*  OCT  5  1909 


^^mm:^ 


BS  1192.5  .P53613  1893 
Piepenbring,  c. 
Theology  of  the  Old 
Testament 


THEOLOGYx^f^'*"^ 


OF   THE 


V 


A 


OLD    TESTAMENT 


BY 


CH.   PIEPENBRING 

Pastor,  and  President  of  the  Reformed  Consistobt 

AT  StRASSBURG 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  FRENCH,  BY  PERMISSION  OF 

THE  AUTHOR,    WITH  ADDED  REFERENCES 

FOR   ENGLISH  READERS 

BY 

H.   G.   MITCHELL 
Propbssor  in  Boston  Univbbsitt 


NEW  YORK 

THOMAS  Y.  CROWELL  &  COMPANY 

PUBLISHERS 


COPTBISHT,  1893, 

Bt  T.  Y.  CROWELL  &  CO. 


TRANSLATOR'S   PREFACE. 


The  book  of  which  this  is  a  translation  made  its  appear- 
ance in  1886.  It  seems  to  have  at  first  attracted  little 
attention  even  in  Europe,  owing  probably  to  the  fact  that 
it  was  written  in  French  and  published  in  Paris.  Schultz, 
who  mentions  a  smaller  work  by  Kayser  of  the  same  date, 
had  evidently  overlooked  this  one,  when,  in  1888,  he  issued 
the  last  edition  of  his  Theologie.  The  book  was  first 
brought  to  the  notice  of  Americans  by  the  Presbyterian 
Quarterly,  in  1888.  The  review  of  it  then  published  was 
very  favorable.  In  fact,  the  reviewer  said  of  it:  "On  the 
whole,  we  regard  it  as  the  best  Theology  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment that  has  yet  been  published." 

In  view  of  this  estimate  it  seems  strange  that  a  transla- 
tion was  not  at  once  undertaken.  Perhaps  the  interest  in 
Biblical  Theology  did  not  then  warrant  such  an  undertak- 
ing; or,  perhaps,  those  who  would  naturally  have  encour- 
aged it  shared  a  wide-spread  prejudice,  according  to  which 
"no  good  thing"  in  theology  can  come  from  France.  It 
must  have  been  a  trace  of  this  prejudice  that  prevented  me 
from  becoming  acquainted  with  the  book.  At  any  rate,  I 
did  not  read  it  until  a  year  ago,  and  when  I  finally  took  it 
in  hand  I  did  not  expect  much  from  its  perusal.     I  was 

iii 


IV  TRANSLATOR  S   PREFACE. 

therefore  surprised  to  find  that,  though  I  could  not  accept 
all  its  statements,  it  gve^v  upon  me  from  the  beginning. 
I  was  pleased  with  the  style,  its  clearness  and  simplicity ; 
but  what  especially  attracted  me  was  a  frankness  and  fear- 
lessness, the  evident  outgrowth  of  the  faith  of  a  sincere 
Christian.  These  characteristics  are  most  apparent  in  the 
Conclusion,  which,  by  the  way,  the  reader  will  do  well  to 
read  next,  thus  making  it  also  a  sort  of  introduction.  This 
Conclusion  so  completely  won  my  confidence,  that,  when  I 
had  read  it,  I  immediately  wrote  to  M.  Piepenbring,  asking 
him,  if  he  had  not  already  made  other  arrangements,  to  let 
me  put  the  book  into  English.  He  readily  assented,  and  I 
at  once  went  to  work  upon  the  translation,  convinced  that 
a  book  written  in  such  a  spirit,  even  if  it  sometimes  yielded 
more  than  was  necessary,  could  not  but  further  the  cause 
of  religion.  I  trust  that  many  will  find  it  very  helpful 
in  their  attempts  to  adjust  themselves  to  any  new  ideas  that 
they  may  feel  obliged  to  adopt. 

The  reader  will  doubtless  be  interested  to  know  something 
personal  about  the  author,  although  his  biography  sounds 
strangely  (for  a  European's)  like  that  of  an  American 
clergyman.  He  is  a  native  of  Alsace,  having  been  born  in 
Mittelbergheim,  of  that  (formerly  French,  now  German) 
province,  in  1840.  There  he  grew  to  manhood,  receiving 
only  the  rudiments  of  an  education  at  the  schools  of  his 
native  village.  When  he  became  a  man,  having  chosen  an 
industrial  career,  he  went  to  Paris  to  seek  his  fortune.  In 
that  city  he  fortunately  found  himself  surrounded  by  Chris- 
tian influences,  the  result   of   which  was   the   conviction 


translator's  preface.  V 

that  he  was  called  to  the  ministry.  In  obedience  to  this 
call  he  abandoned  his  former  employment,  and  entered  a 
preparatory  school  in  Paris-Batignolles.  There  he  took 
a  degree  in  Arts,  and  thence  he  went  to  Strassburg  to  take 
a  theological  course.  At  the  university  he  came  in  contact 
with  several  distinguished  theologians,  but  the  one  who 
seems  to  have  exerted  most  influence  over  him  was  the 
venerable  critic  Keuss,  to  whose  works,  as  will  be  noticed, 
he  constantly  refers. 

In  1871,  when  he  was  thirty-one  years  of  age  (late  for  a 
European),  M.  Piepenbring  received  the  degree  of  Bachelor 
of  Divinity,  and  left  the  University  to  become  pastor  of  a 
small  parish  at  Fonday,  near  Waldersbach,  also  in  Alsace. 
Here  he  remained  eight  years,  at  the  end  of  which  period 
he  was  called  to  the  position  of  French  pastor  of  the  Re- 
formed parish  in  Strassburg.  This  position  he  still  holds, 
as  well  as  that  of  President  of  the  Consistory  to  which  he 
belongs. 

Though  actively  engaged  in  the  duties  of  a  Christian 
minister,  M.  Piepenbring  has  found  time  to  do  no  little  liter- 
ary work.  He  is  a  regular  contributor  to  several  periodi- 
cals. For  the  Revue  de  VHistoire  des  Religions  (Paris), 
he  has  written  a  series  of  articles,  chapters  from  a  forth- 
coming History  of  Israel.  He  also  has  a  Theology  of  the 
New  Testament  in  preparation. 

A  word,  in  conclusion,  respecting  the  translation.  I  have 
endeavored  to  confine  myself  to  the  functions  of  an  inter- 
preter. Now  and  then,  however,  I  have  been  obliged  to 
make  slight  changes  or  additions  in  order  to  adapt  the  book 


VI  TRANSLATOR  S    PREFACE. 

to  the  needs  or  requirements  of  its  new  readers.  Thus,  in 
the  notes,  while,  wherever  a  book  cited  was  translated,  I 
have  simply  given  the  English  title  with  the  corresponding 
page,  etc.,  wherever  there  are  references  to  books  not  yet 
translated,  and  only  such,  I  have  added  references  to  Eng- 
lish authorities  such  as  I  thought  the  author  would  naturally 
quote  in  the  given  cases. 

The  original  has  no  indexes.  I  have  prepared  for  the 
translation  four,  one  of  which  contains  all  the  passages 
cited  in  the  text  of  the  book.  It  did  not  seem  worth  while 
to  include  those  in  the  notes. 

Perhaps  I  ought  to  add  for  the  benefit  of  any  who  may 
not  be  familiar  with  Hebrew,  that  in  the  Hebrew  words 
that  occur,  the  consonants  are  to  be  given  their  usual 
sounds,  except  in  the  following  cases :  hh  is  to  be  pronounced 
like  Vj  dh  like  tli  in  this,  hh  like  the  German  ch,  s  like  a 
sharp  s,  and  q  not  unlike  a  Z?.^  The  vowels  should  be  pro- 
nounced after  what  is  called  the  Continental  method. 

1  In  transliterating  these  words  I  have  not  followed  the  scheme  of 
the  author,  but  (substantially)  the  more  common  one  of  Gesenius' 
Hebrew  Grammar. 


AUTHOE'S   PREFACE. 


We  do  not  think  that  this  publication  needs  a  prolix 
justification.  There  are  only  two  works  in  French  that 
treat  of  this  subject:  the  first  part  of  Haag's  Theologie 
Bihlique  and  Oehler's  Theologie  de  V Ancien  Testament, 
translated  from  the  German  by  M.  de  Kougemont.  But 
though  these  works  both  contain  excellent  features,  they 
both  also  present  lacunm.  They  can  be  criticised  especially 
as  not  showing,  as  completely  and  yet  as  succinctly  as  pos- 
sible, the  development  of  the  religious  thought  and  life  of 
Israel,  using  the  learned  works  of  Germany  as  we  intend 
to  do.  May  this  book  contribute  in  some  measure  to  a 
better  knowledge  of  biblical  truth  in  the  churches  that  use 
the  French  language. 

We  must  not  forget  to  thank  in  this  public  manner  Pro- 
fessor Kayser  for  the  valuable  hints  which  he  has  kindly 
given  us,  and  of  which  we  have  made  great  use  in  the  final 
elaboration  of  this  work.^ 

1  Since  these  lines  were  written  Professor  Kayser  has  been  removed 
by  death  from  the  affectionate  circle  of  his  friends. 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

Preface  iii 

Introduction 1 

I.   Method  and  plan 1 

II.   Literature 3 

FIRST  PERIOD. 

§  1.    MOSAISM 7 

§2.    Ancient  Prophetism  and  the  Art  op   Divination 11 

§  3.   The  Idea  of  God 21 

§4.   The  Covenant  of  Jehovah  with  Israel 29 

§  5.    Ethical  Life 34 

§  6.   Worship 39 

I.    Places  of  worship 39 

II.   The  priesthood 43 

III.  Religious  festivals 47 

1.  The  Sabbath 47 

2.  The  new  moon 48 

3.  The  three  pilgrim  feasts 49 

a.   The  feast  of  passover,  and  of  unleavened  bread  50 

h.    The  feast  of  the  harvest 54 

c.    The  feast  of  tabernacles 55 

IV.  Religious  rites 57 

1.  Circumcision 57 

2.  Sacrifices 59 

3.  The  offering  of  the  first-born,  first-fruits,  and  tithes  63 

4.  Prayer 65 

5.  Vows QQ 

6.  The  anathema 67 

7.  The  nazirate 68 

8.  Fasting 71 

9.  Purifications  and  Levitical  purity 73 

ix 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


SECOND  PERIOD. 

PAGE 

§  7.   Prophetism  in  its  Purity 81 

§  8.    Unity  and  Spirituality  of  God 91 

I.    Unity  of  God 92 

II.  Spirituality  of  God 96 

§  9.   Names  and  Attributes  of  God 99 

I.  Names  of  God 99 

1.  Jehovah  99 

2.  Jehovah,  God  of  hosts 103 

3.  The  Holy  One  of  Israel 106 

4.  God,  the  Strong  One,  the  Mighty  One,  the  Most- 

High,  the  Lord Ill 

II.    Attributes  of  God 114 

1.  Moral  attributes 114 

2.  Metaphysical  attributes 120 

§  10.    Creation 124 

§  11.    Providence 129 

§  12.   The  Manifestation  of  God  in  the  World 137 

I.   The  glory,  the  name,  the  face,  the  malakh  of  God  . . .  138 

1.  The  glory  of  God 138 

2.  The  name  of  God 141 

3.  The  face  of  God 143 

4.  The  malakh  of  God 144 

II.  Cherubim  and  Seraphim 147 

1.  Cherubim 147 

2.  Seraphim 150 

III.  Angels 153 

IV.  The  spirit  of  God 156 

§  13.    The  Nature  of  Man 159 

§  14.    The  Dignity  of  Man 167 

§  15.   Faithfulness  to  Jehovah 173 

§16.    Worship 178 

§  17.    Israel's  Unfaithfulness  and  the  Essence  of  Sin....  185 

§  18.   The  Extent  op  Sin 189 

§  19.   The  Origin  of  Sin 192 

§  20.   The  Guilt  of  Sin 197 

§  21.    The  Day  of  Judgment 201 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS.  xi 

PAGE 

§  22.   Salvation 207 

I.    The  restoration  of  Israel  under  the  new  covenant ....  207 

II.    The  participation  of  the  gentiles  in  the  new  covenant.  212 

§  23.   The  Messiah 217 

§  24.    The  Servant  or  Jehovah , 223 

§  25.   Retribution  and  Theodicy , , . .  233 

THIRD   PERIOD. 

§  26.    Holy  Scripture 241 

§  27.   The  Doctrine  of  God  . . . . , 247 

§  28.    Angelology 253 

§  29.    Demonology 256 

§  30.    Death  and  the  Future  Life , 263 

§  31.    Levitism 276 

I.   The  sanctuary 280 

II.   The  priesthood 285 

III.  Religious  festivals 292 

1.  The  sabbath 292 

2.  The  sabbatical  year 296 

3.  The  year  of  jubilee 298 

4.  The  new  moon  . , 299 

5.  The  pilgrim  feasts 300 

6.  The  day  of  atonement 304 

7.  The  feast  of  purim 306 

IV.  Religious  rites 307 

§  32.    Forgiveness  and  Atonement 309 

§  33.    Ethical  Life 316 

I.   Pharisaism 316 

II.    Exclusivism .320 

III.  Skepticism 323 

IV.  Wisdojn 325 

§  34.    The  Apocalypse  of  Daniel 331 

Conclusion 343 

Indexes 351 


INTRODUCTION. 


I.    METHOD  AND  PLAN. 

We  shall  follow  the  exegetical  and  historical  method. 
It  does  not  need  to  be  vindicated.  All  modern  theo- 
logians worthy  of  the  name  recognize  its  excellence. 
The  dogmatic  method,  hitherto  generally  followed,  is 
more  and  more  neglected  even  by  conservative  theo- 
logians. 

The  majority  of  the  works  that  treat  our  subject 
are  divided  into  two  principal  parts :  the  first  gives 
a  resume^  more  or  less  complete,  of  the  history  of  the 
religion  of  Israel  in  general;  the  second  discusses  the 
religious  ideas  and  practices,  without  taking  account 
of  their  successive  development.  Other  works  present 
only  a  detailed  historical  discussion,  divided  into  a  large 
number  of  periods.  The  disadvantage  of  this  last 
method  is  that  it  sacrifices  the  total  effect  to  the  de- 
tails, necessitates  numerous  repetitions,  and  does  not 
show  the  historical  connection  of  the  various  topics 
treated.  The  other  method  is  faulty  in  presenting  only 
the  history  of  the  religion  of  Israel  in  general,  and 
neglecting  the  historical  development  demonstrable  in 
matters  of  detail.  It  will  be  best,  we  think,  to  leave  to 
works  that  narrate  the  history  of  Israel  the  task  of  giv- 
ing a  general  view  of  their  religion,  and  confine  our- 

1 


2  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

selves  to  showing,  as  far  as  possible,  the  historical 
development  of  each  particular  topic. 

A  number  of  works,  that  of  Oehler,  for  example, 
confine  themselves  exclusively  to  the  teaching  of  the 
canonical  books.  Others,  like  those  of  de  Wette  and 
von  Colin,  include,  in  the  theology  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, the  religious  ideas  that  are  found  among  the  Jews 
at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era.  As  for  us,  we 
shall  not  confine  ourselves  to  the  canonical  books  alone ; 
we  shall  take  into  consideration  the  principal  apocryphal 
books,  but  only  so  far  as  the  teaching  that  they  contain 
is  found  to  develop  or  supplement  that  of  the  canonical 
literature.  We  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  go  further 
and  discuss  the  Jewish  theology  of  the  time  of  Jesus 
and  the  apostles,  since  this  subject  has  been  treated,  and 
well  treated,  by  two  French  scholars,  —  MM.  Nicolas  and 
Stapfer. 

We  shall  divide  our  work  into  three  periods.  The 
first,  from  Moses  to  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  century, 
is  distinguished  by  the  preponderating  influence  exer- 
cised by  traditional  ideas  and  usages,  modified  only  in 
part  by  early  prophecy.  The  second,  from  the  appear- 
ance of  the  oldest  prophetical  books  to  the  end  of  the 
Exile,  is  marked  by  the  great  influence  of  prophecy,  now 
at  its  apogee.  The  third,  from  the  Exile  to  the  first 
century  before  the  Christian  era,  is  characterized  by  the 
extraordinary  influence  of  the  written  law  and  the 
priesthood. 

We  shall  not,  in  every  period,  treat  all  the  questions 
to  which  the  documents  bearing  on  it  refer.  This  would 
be  a  decidedly  mechanical  process  that  would  necessitate 
numerous  repetitions.     We  shall  treat,  as  far  as  possible, 


INTRODUCTION.  3 

in  each  period,  questions  that,  for  the  time  being,  are 
most  prominent,  and  refer  to  the  same  questions  in  the 
other  periods  only  when  they  are  presented  in  a  new 
light. 

II.    LITEKATUEE. 

A  historical  discussion  of  the  religion  of  Israel  pre- 
supposes a  knowledge  of  the  literature  of  this  people, 
and  exact  notions  concerning  the  dates  of  the  various 
documents  belonging  to  this  literature.  We^are  of 
course  not  able  here  to  enter  into  a  discussion  of  the 
numerous  and  complicated  problems  that  are  treated  in 
works  on  introduction  to  the  Old  Testament ;  we  must 
confine  ourselves  to  giving  the  results  that  appear  to 
us  certain  or  probable,  referring  the  reader  to  special 
treatises  for  details. 

The  literature  of  the  first  period  is  the  following: 
The  oldest  portion  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  book 
of  Joshua,  which  we  shall  call  document  A,  the  residue 
after  removing  the  Deuteronomic  portion  and  the 
Elohistic  or  Priestly  document,  of  which  more  here- 
after ;  the  book  of  Judges,  the  books  of  Samuel,  and 
the  first  ten  chapters  of  1  Kings,  with  the  exception 
of  the  additions  made  by  the  last  editor  of  these  books ; 
finally,  the  Song  of  Songs. 

To  the  second  i^eriod  belong  nearly  all  the  prophetical 
books,  in  the  following  order :  — 

End  of  the  ninth  century  or  beginning  of  the  eighth : 
Isa.  XV.  1-xvi.  12.  First  half  of  the  eighth  century: 
Amos,  Hosea,  and  perhaps  Zech.  ix.-xi.  Second  half 
of  the  eighth  century:  Isa.  i.-xii. ;  xiv.  24-32;  chaps, 
xvii.-xx.;    xxi.   11-xxiii.  18;    chaps,  xxviii.-xxxiii. ; 


4  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

xxxvii.  21-35 ;  xxxviii.  9-20 ;  Micah,  and  perhaps 
Nahum.  Second  half  of  the  seventh  century  :  Jeremiah, 
with  the  exception  of  the  last  three  chapters ;  Zepha- 
niah,  Habakkuk  and  perhaps  Zech.  xii.-xiv.  Begin- 
ning of  the  sixth  century  and  of  the  Exile  :  Ezekiel 
and  Lamentations.  Middle  of  the  sixth  century  and 
toward  the  end  of  the  Exile:  Jer.  l.-lii. ;  Isa.  xiii. 
1-xiv.  23;  xxi.  1-10;  chaps,  xxiv.-xxvii. ;  chaps, 
xxxiv.  f . ;  chaps,  xl.-lxvi.  (deutero-Isaiah). 

To  this  period  also  probably  belongs  the  book  of  Job, 
although  it  is  diiBcult  to  say  at  just  what  date  it  was 
written. 

In  622  was  discovered  in  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  the 
legislation  of  Deuteronomy.  Nearly  all  of  this  book 
and  some  fragments  of  the  book  of  Joshua  seem  to  be 
the  work  of  the  same  hand  or  at  least  of  the  same  epoch. 
"We  shall  call  this  portion  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the 
book  of  Joshua  document  B. 

It  was  at  the  end  of  this  period  when  a  single  editor 
put  the  books  of  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings  into  their 
final  form.  Many  portions  of  these  books  bear  clear 
marks  of  the  last  redaction.  The  contents  of  the 
books  of  Kings,  and  those  of  the  other  historical  books 
above  mentioned,  were,  in  great  part,  based  on  earlier 
written  sources. 

To  this  period  also  we  refer  the  book  of  Ruth. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  third  period  stand  the  book 
of  Haggai,  written  520,  and  Zech.  i.-viii.,  written  be- 
tween 520  and  518.  It  may  be  that  Joel  and  Obadiah 
also  date  from  this  epoch,  although  the  majority  of 
critics  regard  the  former  as  the  oldest  of  the  propheti- 
cal books,  and  some  likewise  consider  the  latter  very 


INTRODUCTION.  5 

ancient.  Malachi  was  written  toward  440,  and  Jonah 
in  the  fifth  or  even  in  the  fourth  century. 

In  the  fifth  century  occurred  also  the  redaction  of  the 
most  recent  portions  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  book  of 
Joshua,  usually  styled  the  Elohistic  document,  which  we 
shall  call  document  C.  The  oldest  portion  of  it  is  the 
section  Lev.  xvii.-xxvi.,  which  was  probably  written 
during  the  Exile. 

Toward  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  or  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  third,  appeared  Chronicles,  as  well  as  the 
books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  They  contain  memoirs 
from  the  hands  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

Ecclesiastes  was  written  toward  the  end  of  the  third 
century;  so  also  Esther;  Daniel  dates  from  167-164. 

We  merely  mention  here  Proverbs  and  the  Psalms, 
because  they  both  belong  to  epochs  very  various  and 
uncertain.  A  large  number  of  proverbs  were  a  sort  of 
heritage  of  the  whole  nation,  passing  from  mouth  to 
mouth,  and  from  one  generation  to  another,  a  long  time 
before  they  became  part  of  a  written  collection.  In 
the  second  and  fourth  parts  of  the  book  of  Proverbs  (x. 
1-xxii.  16,  and  chaps,  xxv.-xxix.)  are  found  the  oldest 
maxims.  Chapters  i.-ix.  seem  to  be  the  latest  portion  ; 
we  think  that  they  had  their  origin  not  earlier  than  the 
third  period.  The  book,  then,  in  its  present  form,  can- 
not be  older.  It  is  difificult  to  say  precisely  at  what 
epoch  each  of  the  various  parts  of  the  collection  was 
formed,  and  when  the  whole  received  its  final  shape. 

What  we  have  just  said  of  Proverbs  applies,  in  part, 
to  the  Psalms.  It  is  impossible  to  say  just  when  the 
various  psalms  were  written,  when  each  of  the  five 
books  of  the  Psalter  was  compiled,  and  when  the  whole 


6  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

received  its  present  form.  There  are  psalms  that  may 
be  attributed  to  David,  and  others  that  belong  perhaps 
to  the  epoch  of  the  Maccabees ;  but  there  is  a  lack  of 
data  reliable  enough  for  determining  the  date  of  each. 
It  seems  certain,  however,  that  in  the  first  book  of  the 
Psalter  we  have  the  oldest  psalms,  and  that  the  last 
books  contain  the  latest. 

The  apocryphal  books  that  will  be  taken  into  account 
were  written  between  the  beginning  of  the  second  and 
the  end  of  the  first  century  before  the  Christian  era. 
To  the  second  century  also  belongs  the  translation  of 
the  Seventy,  to  which  frequent  reference  will  be  made. 

We  shall  usually  cite  passages  of  the  apocryphal 
books  according  to  this  version,  because  the  various 
modern  versions  differ  so  widely  from  one  another  in 
the  division  of  the  chapters  and  verses. 

As  there  is  sometimes  the  same  liability  to  confusion 
in  the  case  of  the  canonical  books,  we  shall  cite  passages 
taken  from  them  according  to  Segond's  translation, 
which  is  already  very  widely  known  and  will  grow  in 
popularity.  When  we  have  occasion  to  refer  to  the 
original,  we  shall  of  course  quote  the  Hebrew  Bible. 
The  reader  who  cannot  refer  to  this  text  will  do  well  to 
consult  the  Lausanne  translation,  wdiich  is  more  literal 
than  the  others,  and  which  will  better  enable  him  to  see 
the  reason  for,  or  the  aptness  of,  a  given  citation.^ 

1  [The  translator  might  have  substituted,  for  quotations  from  the 
French  Bible,  the  words  of  the  Revised  English  Version,  and  for  those 
from  the  original,  direct  translations  of  his  own,  but  it  has  seemed 
fairer  to  the  author  simply  to  translate  all  these  quotations  from  the 
text  of  his  book.] 


FIRST  PERIOD, 


§  1.    MOSAISM. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  Pentateuch  attributes  to 
Moses  a  work  of  truly  colossal  proportions :  the  deliver- 
ance of  the  people  Israel  from  bondage  in  Egypt,  their 
religious  and  social  organization,  and  finally  a  very 
extensive  and  complicated  legislation.  But,  in  view 
of  the  results  of  modern  criticism,  one  may  well  ask 
whether  it  is  now  possible  to  know  for  certain  any- 
thing concerning  the  person  and  work  of  the  great 
legislator. 

When  one  closely  examines  the  historical  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  it  is  easily  perceived  that  the  his- 
torical sense  was  not  developed  to  any  greater  extent 
among  the  Israelites  than  among  most  of  the  other 
peoples  of  antiquity ;  they  constantly  construct  the  past 
according  to  the  present,  or  transfer  the  present  to  the 
past;  they  imagine  the  institutions  existing  at  any  given 
epoch  as  dating  from  the  remotest  antiquity,  and  write 
history  accordingly.  This  should  not,  however,  surprise 
us,  since  the  same  phenomenon  is  reproduced  in  the 
bosom  of  the  Christian  Church.  Even  now  most  Catho- 
lics imagine  that  the  institutions  of  their  church  go  back 
to  Jesus  and  the  apostles,  and  ecclesiastical  history  has 
been  written  in  good  faith  from  this  point  of  view.     In 

7 


8        THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

the  various  Protestant  churches  also  it  is  fondly  believed 
that  the  dogmas  held  are  a  faithful  expression  of  the 
teaching  of  Jesus  and  the  apostles,  and  more  than  once 
this  teaching  has,  in  all  sincerity,  been  modelled  after 
modern  dogmatic  systems. 

One  has  only  to  compare  Chronicles  with  the  parallel 
accounts  of  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings,  and  the 
parallel  accounts  of  these  last  with  one  another,  to  see 
that,  in  the  various  narratives,  the  same  event  is  often 
reported  in  different  ways,  sometimes  from  entirely 
different  points  of  view,  and  that  the  history  of  Israel 
is  transformed  and  transfigured  by  passing  from  mouth 
to  mouth  and  from  one  generation  to  another.  The 
same  fact  may  be  observed  in  the  Pentateuch. 

In  Genesis  we  have  a  double  account  of  the  creation 
and  the  deluge,  and  the  two  narratives  differ  greatly 
from  each  other.  In  the  history  of  the  patriarchs,  also, 
many  events  are  narrated  two,  or  even  three,  times,  and 
in  a  manner  often  very  different.  It  is  the  same  with 
other  accounts  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  book  of 
Joshua.  This  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  the  Penta- 
teuch and  the  book  of  Joshua  are  a  compilation  of 
materials  drawn  from  sources  of  different  epochs  and 
origins.  What  is  true  of  the  narratives  is  equally  true 
of  the  legislative  portions.  The  oldest  laws  are  found 
in  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  and  xxxiv.  Now,  when  this  legis- 
lation is  compared  with  that  of  Deuteronomy,  it  is 
discovered  that,  while  there  are  numerous  analogies, 
there  are  still  more  numerous  differences.  And  when 
these  two  series  of  laws  are  placed  alongside  the  other 
legislative  provisions  contained  in  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
and  Numbers,  the  discrepancies  appear  even  more  pro- 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  1.    MOSAISM.  9 

nounced.  The  French  work  of  M.  Reus3  on  the  Bible, 
and  the  majority  of  the  commentaries,  furnish  abundant 
proof  in  support  of  these  assertions. 

These  legislative  collections,  so  different  and  often 
even  contradictory,  cannot  all  have  originated  with 
Moses.  We  have  seen,  indeed,  that  one  portion  of  the 
legislation  of  the  Pentateuch  dates  only  from  the  time 
of  Ezra,  and  another  from  the  time  of  Josiah.  There 
remains  the  oldest  portion  above  mentioned.  Is  it  by 
Moses  ?  The  most  competent  critics  agree  that  it  is  not, 
but  that,  on  the  contrary,  it  did  not  originate  before  David. 
It  has  even  been  demonstrated  that  the  Decalogue,  the 
kernel  of  which  may  well  be  as  old  as  Moses,  in  its  pres- 
ent form,  is  not  of  so  ancient  a  date.  What,  then,  can 
we  know  for  certain  concerning  the  legislative  activity 
of  Moses,  in  which  we  are  particularly  interested  ?  It  is 
difficult  to  say.  It  has  even  been  suggested  that  Moses 
is  only  a  mythical  personage.  But  since  the  people  Israel 
attributed  to  him  the  laws  successively  developed  among 
them,  as  they  attributed  their  psalms  to  David  and  their 
proverbs  to  Solomon,  we  are  authorized  to  think  that 
Moses  is  a  historical  personage  as  much  as  these  two 
kings,  and  that  he  was  the  first  great  legislator  of  Israel, 
as  David  was  their  first  important  hymnist,  and  Solomon 
their  first  distinguished  didactic  poet.  Just,  however, 
as  it  is  next  to  impossible  to  distinguish  the  genuine 
psalms  of  David  and  the  genuine  proverbs  of  Solomon 
from  those  that  were  later  erroneously  attributed  to  them, 
so  it  is  impossible  to  distinguish  the  laws  originating  with 
Moses  from  those  that  do  not  belong  to  him.  We  are 
perfectly  certain  that  a  large  number  of  the  laws  of  the 
Pentateuch  are  not  Mosaic.     There  are  others  that  may 


10  THEOLOGY  OF  THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

be,  although  we  have  not  the  means  of  establishing  the 
fact  with  certainty.  We  shall,  therefore,  at  most,  be 
able  to  arrive  at  the  spirit  of  Mosaism,  at  its  funda- 
mental principles,  by  induction,  starting  from  early 
prophetism  and  the  religious  and  moral  condition  of 
the  times  following  those  of  Moses.  These  principles 
we  shall  seek  to  unfold  in  the  following  paragraphs. 

It  will  be  understood,  after  what  has  just  been  said, 
why  we  have  not  begun  our  discussion  with  the  patri- 
archs, as  it  has  been  the  custom  to  do.  Since  it  is  next 
to  impossible  to  distinguish  with  certainty  historical 
data  from  later  additions  in  the  accounts  respecting 
Moses,  there  can  be  still  less  hope  of  being  able  to 
make  such  a  distinction  in  the  narratives  in  Genesis 
relating  to  a  more  remote  epoch.  The  contents  of  Gen- 
esis are  certainly,  to  an  even  greater  degree  than  those 
of  the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch,  a  reflex  of  later 
times.  We  are  able  to  learn  from  them  what  was  the 
religious  and  moral  ideal  of  the  Israelites  at  the  time 
when  these  various  stories  had  their  origin,  but  not 
what  was  the  religious  and  moral  life  of  the  patriarchs 
themselves. 

Certain  isolated  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  teach 
us  that  the  ancestors  of  Israel  were  devoted  to  the 
idolatrous  usages  of  the  other  Semitic  peoples  until 
the  time  of  Moses  and  Joshua.^  As  all  subsequent  his- 
tory shows  us  that  the  inclination  to  idolatry  remained 
dominant  in  Israel  until  the  Exile,  in  spite  of  the  ener- 
getic and  incessant  efforts  of  the  prophets  to  extirpate 

1  Josh.  xxiv.  2,  14,  23;  Amos  v.  25  f.  ;  Ezek.  xvi.  20  ff.,  26  ff.; 
XX.  6  ff.,  15  ff.,  24  ff.  ;  xxiii.  3,  8  ;  comp.  Gen.  xxxi.  19,  30  ff.  ;  xxxv. 
2  ff.  :  Ex.  xxxii. 


FIEST  PERIOD.  —  §  2.    ANCIENT   PROPHETISM.         11 

it,  we  may  conclude  that  these  isolated  references  are 
perfectly  historical,  and  that  the  picture  of  the  religion 
of  their  ancestors  that  later  generations  painted  and  left 
us  is  an  ideal  picture. 

§  2.    ANCIENT  PEOPHETISM  AND   THE  ART   OF 
DIVINATION. 

Moses  was  not  only  the  first  legislator,  but  also  the 
first  genuine  prophet  of  his  people.^  There  is  no  doubt 
that  he  sought  to  impress  his  spirit  upon  the  elect  of 
his  nation  and  thus  provide  himself  with  successors  in 
his  work.  We  read  in  the  book  of  Numbers  that,  while 
he  was  yet  living,  the  spirit  of  God  and  the  gift  of 
prophecy  were  bestowed  upon  a  certain  number  of  the 
elders  of  Israel.^  It  is  therefore  very  probable  that 
Moses  had  immediate  successors,  and  that,  beginning 
with  this  epoch,  the  succession  of  prophets  was  unin- 
terrupted, though  the  early  traditions  of  Israel,  which 
are  rich  enough  in  military  and  political  details,  have 
preserved  on  this  more  spiritual  subject  only  very  vague 
and  incomplete  references.^  Jeremiah  expressly  says 
that,  after  the  exodus  from  Egypt,  Jehovah  constantly 
sent  prophets  to  his  people.*  In  the  times  of  the  Judges, 
however,  the  prophets  seem  to  have  been  few  in  num- 
ber.^ Except  Deborah,  who  is  called  a  prophetess,^  there 
is  mention  of  a  prophet  only  in  Jud.  vi.  7  ff.  and  1  Sam. 
ii.  27  ff.     But  these  various  data  do  not  furnish  us  exact 

1  Hos.  xii.  13  ;  Deut.  xviii.  15,  18  ;  xxxiv.  10. 

2  Chap.  xi.  24  ff. 

3  Reuss,  Les  Prophetes^  I.  pp.  5,  7  f . ;  idem,  Gesch.  der  h.  Schriften 
A.  T.,  §  115;  Schultz,  Old  Testament  Theology,  I.  p.  239. 

*  Jer.  vii.  25.  ^  1  Sam.  iii.  1.  ^  Jud.  iv.  4. 


12  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

and  reliable  indications  touching  the  character  and  in- 
fluence of  early  prophetism.  It  appears  to  us,  with 
somewhat  distinct  outlines,  first  in  Samuel,  who  is 
incontestably  the  most  conspicuous  personage,  after 
Moses,  in  the  history  of  Israel. 

Samuel  enjoyed  a  high  degree  of  consideration  among 
his  people.^  The  best  proof  of  this  is  the  fact  that 
"two  rival  dynasties  appeal  to  him  to  establish  their 
right  to  the  throne."  He  performed  the  functions  of 
a  judge.^  But  he  was  greatest  of  all  in  the  religious 
influence  that  he  exerted.  He  contended  vigorously 
against  idolatry  and  all  unfaithfulness  to  Jehovah.^  His 
chief  work,  from  a  religious  point  of  view,  was  the 
foundation  of  the  schools  of  prophets,  by  which  he 
became  the  promoter  of  a  movement  of  the  greatest 
importance  for  the  future  of  the  religion  of  Israel. 

It  is,  no  doubt,  Samuel  to  whom  must  be  attributed 
this  remarkable  institution.  Before  him  there  is  no  men- 
tion of  it.  There  is,  in  fact,  as  we  have  seen,  little 
reference  to  prophets  as  a  class.  Samuel,  on  the  other 
hand,  appears  at  the  head  of  a  guild  of  prophets,*  schools 
of  whom  are  found  chiefly  in  the  districts  and  places 
where  he  resides  and  pursues  his  calling.  They  are 
mentioned  in  connection  with  Gibeah,  near  Ramah, 
Bethel,  Jericho,  Gilgal ;  ^  that  is,  places  chiefly  in  the 
mountains  of  Ephraim.^  Now  it  is  this  region,  and 
generally  the  places  mentioned,  in  which  we  find  Sam- 
uel sojourning.     He  had  his  house  at  Ramah,  where  he 

1  1  Sam.  iii.  20  f.  ;  ix.  6  ;  xii.  3-5  ;  xxv.  1  ;  xxviii.  3  ;  Jer.  xv.  1. 

2  1  Sam.  vii.  15.         ^2  Sam.  vii.  3-6  ;  xv.  17  ff.        *  1  Sam.  xix.  20. 

5  1  Sam.  X.  5,  10  ;  xix.  18-20  ;  2  Kings  ii.  3,  5  ;  iv.  38. 

6  2  Kings  V,  22, 


FIRST    PERIOD. §  2.    ANCIENT   PROPHETISM.         13 

usually  lived,  and  where  he  was  buried.^  From  Ramah 
he  betook  himself  every  year  to  Bethel,  Gilgal,  and 
Mispah,  to  judge  the  people.^  At  Gilgal  he  often 
gathered  great  popular  assemblies.*  We  see  him  also 
at  Gibeah.* 

Maybaum  always  contends  that  Samuel  did  nothing 
but  reform  the  schools  of  the  prophets,  which  existed 
before  his  day ;  that  he  combated  the  art  of  divination 
which  had  thus  far  been  chiefly  cultivated  therein; 
that  he  stamped  them  with  a  character  more  elevated, 
more  ideal ;  and  that  thus  he  gave  to  prophetism  the 
impulse  resulting  in  the  greater  spirituality  of  later 
times.^  This  statement  is  not  absolutely  improbable ; 
but  it  is  not  perfectly  established,  as  it  cannot  be,  since 
the  positive  data  are  too  meagre  on  this  point. 

The  pupils  of  these  schools  bore  the  name  of  sons 
of  prophets,^  and  their  teachers  probably  that  of  fathers.'^ 
These  sons  of  prophets,  sometimes  also  called  simply 
prophets,^  were  very  numerous.  They  are  mentioned 
by  hundreds.^  They  were  of  course  mostly  young  per- 
sons,^*^  but  there  were  married  men  among  them.^^  Later 
we  find  Elijah  and  Elisha  at  their  head.^^     After  these 

1  1  Sam.  vii.  17  ;  viii.  4  ;  xix.  18  ;  xxv.  1 ;  xxviii.  3. 

2  1  Sam.  vii.  15  f. 

8  1  Sam.  X.  8  ;  xi.  14  f. ;  xiii.  18  ff.  ;  xv.  33. 
*  1  Sam.  xiii.  15. 

^  Eritwickelung  des  isral.  Prophetenthums,  pp.  38  ff. 
6  1  Kings  XX.  35  ;  2  Kings  ii.  3,  5,  7,  15. 

■^  1  Sam.  X.  12  ;  2  Kings  ii.  12  ;  comp.  vi.  21 ;  xiii.  14 ;  Prov.  i.  8 ; 
iv.  1. 

8  1  Sam.  xix.  20  ;  1  Kings  xx.  35 ;  comp.  vv.  38,  41. 

9  1  Kings  xviii.  4,  13  ;  xxii.  6  ;  2  Kings  ii.  7,  16  ;  iv.  43  ;  vi.  1. 

10  2  Kings  V.  22  ;  ix.  1,  4.  n  2  Kings  iv.  1. 

12  2  Kings  ii.  15 ;  iv.  1  ff.,  38  ;  vi.  1  ff. 


14  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

two  great  prophets,  history  makes  no  further  mention  of 
them. 

What  was  done  in  these  schools  of  prophets,  and 
what  was  the  object  of  them  ?  The  sacred  text  teaches 
us  next  to  nothing  on  this  subject.  One  can  gather 
from  1  Sam.  x.  5,  at  most,  only  that  the  pupils  of  the 
prophets  practised  vocal  and  instrumental  music.  It 
may  be  taken  for  granted  that  in  their  meetings  they 
practised,  also,  reading,  writing,  and  speaking ;  that 
they  were  instructed  in  religion,  social  ethics,  and  law ; 
that  among  them  were  preserved  and  developed  the 
principles  of  Mosaism.^  The  essential  object  of  these 
associations  was  evidently  that  pursued  by  Samuel, 
Elijah,  Elisha,  and  all  the  genuine  prophets  of  Israel ; 
namely,  the  maintenance  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah 
against  the  ceaseless  attacks  of  idolatry.  It  was  a 
grand  task  to  which  they  were  devoted  in  these  schools 
of  prophets.  But  they  probably  also  practised  the  art 
of  divination,  which,  as  we  shall  see,  was  inseparable 
from  ancient  prophetism. 

To  get  a  somewhat  adequate  idea  of  this  prophetism, 
which  was  far  from  being  of  the  dignity  of  that  of  later 
times,  one  must  not  lose  sight  of  what  is  reported 
(1  Sam.  xix.  20  ff.)  of  an  assembly  of  disciples  of 
prophets,  over  which  Samuel  himself  presided.  We  are 
told  that  Saul  sent  thither,  three  times,  persons  to  take 
David,  and  that  these  messengers,  seeing  the  assembly 
prophesying,  were  themselves  also  seized  by  the  spirit 
of  God,  and,  in  their  turn,  made  to  prophesy ;  that 
Saul,  also,  upon  betaking  himself  thither  in  person,  fell 

1  Reuss,  Les  Frophetes,  I.  p.  11;  Geschichte,  §  119;  [Robertson, 
JEarly  Beligion  of  Israel,  pp.  91  f£.]. 


FIRST  PERIOD. — §2.    ANCIENT   PROPHETISM.         15 

under  the  same  influence  of  the  spirit  of  God,  and 
prophesied,  stripping,  like  the  others,  his  garments  from 
him,  and  remaining  a  day  and  a  night  stretched  naked 
on  the  ground.  Hence  we  see  that,  anciently,  those 
who  wished  to  prophesy  put  themselves  into  a  state 
of  religious  ecstasy  or  exaltation,  which  was  induced 
by  the  aid  of  music,  songs  and  probably  instrumental 
accompaniments  to  dancing,  and  which  might  produce 
the  strangest  effects,  finally  resulting  in  complete  and 
prolonged  prostration. 

Prophecy,  thus  understood,  could  not  consist  of  dis- 
courses like  the  prophetic  preaching,  since  prophets, 
gathered  in  great  numbers,  prophesied  at  the  same  time. 
Reuss,  therefore,  here  and  elsewhere,  renders  the  word 
prophesy  by  sing  \^chanter'].  The  correctness  of  this 
rendering  appears  from  1  Sam.  x.  5,  where  reference  is 
made  to  a  band  of  prophets  coming  down  from  the  high 
place,  preceded  by  the  lute,  the  tambourine,  the  flute, 
and  the  harp,  and  prophesying.  Reuss,  on  this  pas- 
sage, makes  the  following  remark :  "  The  band,  preceded 
by  instruments,  sang  hymns,  sacred  songs,  probably 
dancing  and  evincing  by  gestures  a  certain  momentary 
exaltation.  There  is  the  less  reason  for  thinking  of 
discourses,  since  the  prophets,  who  are  numerous,  all 
speak  and  have  no  hearers."  We  see  from  2  Kings  iii. 
15,  that,  still  later,  music  was  considered  an  indispensa- 
ble means  of  producing  prophetic  inspiration. 

The  fact  that  all  sorts  of  eccentricities  were  mingled 

with  ancient  prophetism,  is  evidently  the  reason  why 

the  prophets  are  sometimes  treated  as  fools  or  madmen. ^ 

The  curious  symbolic  acts  that  they  employed  to  express 

1  Hos.  ix.  7  ;  Jer.  xxix.  26  ;  2  Kings  ix.  11. 


16       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

their  idea  the  more  picturesquely,  also  helped  to  gain 
them  this  reputation.^ 

Beginning  with  Samuel  and  the  appearance  of  the 
schools  of  prophets,  one  meets  prophets  in  Israel  for 
several  centuries.  The  most  influential  of  those  who 
belong  to  our  period  seem  to  have  been  Elijah  and  his 
disciple  Elisha.  We  do  not,  however,  consider  it 
necessary  to  dwell  on  everything  that  is  reported  con- 
cerning them.  For  it  is  clear  that,  when  the  historical 
books  that  tell  us  of  them  were  edited,  their  deeds  and 
teachings  were  to  some  extent  colored  by  the  influence 
of  later  prophetism.  We  come  to  perceive  this  in  the 
period  following,  and  by  the  help  of  the  most  reliable 
documents;  namely,  the  writings  emanating  from  the 
prophets  themselves.  For  the  present  we  shall  confine 
ourselves  to  noticing  the  features  peculiar  to  ancient 
prophetism  of  which  we  have  not  thus  far  spoken. 

In  ancient  times  it  was  customary  to  go  to  consult  the 
prophets  as  diviners.  They  were  considered  as,  first  of 
all,  seers,2  men  who  saw  things  that  others  were  not  able 
to  see.  Thus  Saul  went  to  Samuel  to  learn  from  him 
what  had  become  of  his  father's  stray  asses  ;  ^  Jeroboam 
sent  his  wife  to  the  prophet  Ahijah  to  ask  what  would 
happen  to  his  sick  son ;  *  and  Benhadad,  king  of  Syria, 
sent  to  consult  Elisha  as  to  whether  he  should  recover 
from  his  sickness.^  It  appears  also,  from  these  three 
and  other  cases,^  that  the  profession  of  a  seer  was  a 
remunerative  one. 

1 1  Kings  xi.  29  ff.  ;  xx.  35  ;  xxii.  11  ;  2  Kings  xiii.  15  ff. ;  Isa.  viii. 
1  ;  XX.  2  f.  ;  Jer.  xix.  1  ff.,  10  ff.  ;  xxvii.  1  ff.,  12  ff.  ;  xxviii.  10  ff. ;  xliii. 
8  ff . ;  li.  59  ff. ;  Ezek.  xxiv.  15  ff.  ;  xxxvii.  15  ff. 

2  1  Sam.  ix.  9.      3  chap.  ix.     ^  1  Kings  xiv.  1  ff.     ^2  Kings  viii.  7  ff. 

6  Num.  xxii.  7  ;  1  Kings  xiii.  7  ;  2  Kings  v.  15 ;  Mic.  iii.  11. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  2.    ANCIENT   PROPHETISM.         17 

In  ancient  times  dreams  and  visions  must  have 
played  an  important  part  in  the  activity  of  the  prophets. 
An  old  passage,  indeed,  attributes  to  Jehovah  these 
words:  "When  there  is  among  you  a  prophet,  in  a 
vision  will  I,  Jehovah,  reveal  myself  to  him ;  in  a  dream 
will  I  speak  to  him."  ^  Visions  and  dreams,  as  means 
of  revelation,  occupy  a  large  place  even  in  the  history 
of  the  patriarchs.2  There  are  references  to  dreams  of 
this  kind  also  in  Jud.  vii.  13  £f.  and  1  Kings  iii.  5  ff. 
Finally,  another  old  passage,  1  Sam.  xxviii.  6,  mentions 
dreams  as  employed  by  Jehovah  equally  with  urim  and 
prophets.  Later,  however,  there  seems  to  have  been 
great  distrust  of  this  means  of  revelation.^ 

It  is  evident  that  ancient  prophetism  was  not  clearly 
distinguished  from  the  art  of  divination  as  it  was  prac- 
tised among  almost  all  the  peoples.  This  explains  why 
it  was  admitted  in  Israel  that  Jehovah  spoke  by  the 
mouths  of  foreign  diviners,  by  that  of  Balaam,  for  exam- 
ple ;  ^  that  the  priests  and  diviners  of  the  Philistines 
were  able  to  make  truthful  announcements  ;  ^  that  God 
was  able  to  reveal  himself  in  dreams  and  speak  to  Gen- 
tiles as  well  as  to  the  patriarchs.^  Moses  and  his  mira- 
cles are  placed  upon  almost  the  same  level  as  the  magi- 
cians of  Egypt  and  their  prodigies.'^ 

All  this,  moreover,  finds  confirmation  in  some  other 
usages  of  which  this  is  the  place  to  speak.     Thus,  the 

1  Num.  xii.  6  ;  comp.  Joel  ii.  28 ;  Job  xxxiii.  15. 

2  Gen.  XV.  1  ff.,  12  ff. ;  xxviii.  12  ff.  ;  xxxi.  10,  24  ;  xxxvii.  5  ff.,  9  ff. ; 
xlvi.  2  ff. 

3  Jer.  xxiii.  25  ff. ;  xxvii.  9  ;  xxix.  8  ;  Zech.  x.  2  ;  Deut.  xiii.  1  ff. ; 
Eccl.  V.  7. 

4  Num.  xxiii.  5  ff.;  xxiv.  2  ff.  5  i  g.jn.  yi.  2  ff. 

6  Gen.  XX.  3  ff.;  xl.  5  ff.;  xli.  1  ff.  7  Ex.  vii.  11  f.  ;  viii.  3,  14. 


18  THEOLOGY   OF    THE    OLD   TESTAMENT. 

direction  of  Jehovah  was  asked  in  difficult  circum- 
stances, in  embarrassing  situations.^  This  was  ordinarily- 
done  at  the  sanctuary  and  through  the  mediation  of  the 
priest.2  Yet,  according  to  document  A,  the  people  con- 
sulted God  also  by  the  aid  of  Moses,^  who,  besides,  as 
we  shall  see,  performed  sacerdotal  functions  and,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  was  a  prophet.  Samuel  also  was  at 
the  same  time  priest  and  prophet.  Generally  speaking, 
as  long  as  the  prophetism  of  Israel  was  more  or  less  con- 
founded with  the  art  of  divination,  the  priests  and  the 
prophets  did  not  form  two  distinct  classes  of  men  of 
God :  every  priest  was  a  prophet  or  diviner,  and  every 
prophet  was  a  diviner  and  a  priest,  as  was  the  case 
among  most  of  the  peoples.* 

In  consulting  Jehovah,  urim  and  thu7nmim  were  em- 
ployed. "The  word  urim  by  virtue  of  its  etymology 
points  to  the  enlightening  effect,  thuminim  to  the  cor- 
rectness and  reliability,  of  the  divine  response."  ^  This 
oracle  was  employed  from  the  earliest  times,  as  is  appar- 
ent from  an  old  passage,  where  it  appears  as  a  means  of 
revelation  with  dreams  and  prophets ;  ^  and  as  indicated 
by  Deut.  xxxiii.  8,  it  was  early  entrusted  to  the  sacer- 
dotal caste.  According  to  document  C,  the  high-priest 
alone  could  be  its  guardian,  the  urim  and  thunmhn 
forming  part  of  his  sacerdotal  dress.*" 

1  Gen.  XXV.  22  ;  Ex.  xviii.  15  ;  Josh.  ix.  14 ;  Jud.  i.  1  ;  xx.  23  ;  1 
Sam.  X.  22  ;  xxiii.  2  ;  xxviii.  6  ;  2  Sam.  ii.  1  ;  v.  19,  23  ff.;  xxi.  1. 

2  Jud.  xviii.  5  f.  ;  xx.  18,  27  ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  36  f.  ;  xxii.  9  1,  13. 

3  Ex.  xviii.  15  ;  xxxiii.  7. 

4  Wellliausen,  History  of  Israel,  p.  396  ;  Maybaum,  pp.  7  ff.  ;  [W. 
Kobertsoii  Smith,  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church,  p.  285]. 

5  Oehler,  Old  Testament  Theology,  §  97.  «  1  Sam  xxviii.  6, 
■^  Ex.  xxviii.  30  ;  Lev.  viii.  8  ;  Num.  xxvii.  21. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  2.    ANCIENT   PROPHETISM.        19 

The  archseologists  have  been  at  great  pains  to  ex^jlain 
of  what  this  oracle  consisted,  and  how  one  proceeded 
to  learn  by  its  aid  the  will  of  God.  It  is  probable  that 
the  response  was  given  by  means  of  the  lot ;  ^  for  the 
Israelites  made  use  of  it  from  the  remotest  antiquity  in 
the  conviction  that  the  result  obtained  from  it  con- 
formed to  the  will  of  God  and  the  truth.^ 

In  consulting  God,  the  epJiod,  also,  was  employed. 
This  term  ordinarily  designates  a  sacerdotal  garment.^ 
But  it  seems  also  to  have  denoted  a  carved  image,  or 
rather  the  plating  that  covered  this  image,  which  was  an 
object  of  adoration,  and  probably  a  symbolical  represen- 
tation of  Jehovah.4  This  is  the  case,  also,  1  Sam.  xxiii. 
9  ff.,  XXX.  7  f.,  where  the  ephod  appears  precisely  like 
an  oracle.^  One  may  suppose  that  the  lot  also  was  used 
when  God  was  consulted  by  means  of  the  ephod. 

The  Israelites  sometimes  asked  God  to  reveal  to  them 
his  will  by  a  certain  sign.  Eliezer  did  so,  that  he  might 
recognize  the  young  woman  who  was  to  be  the  wife  of 
Isaac; 6  and  Gideon,  that  he  might  be  assured  that 
Jehovah  was  speaking  to  him,  and  had  chosen  him  to 
deliver  Israel.^  Or  God  himself  designated  the  sign  by 
which  his  servants  might  perceive  what  they  were  to 

1  Riehm's  Handworterbuch,  pp.  916  f. ;  [W.  R.  Smith,  Old  Test., 

pp.  42  1] . 

2  Josh.  vii.  14  n.  ;  xiv.  2  ;  1  Sam.  x.  20  ff. ;  xiv.  44  f.  ;  Num.  xxvi. 
55  f.  ;  Prov.  xvi.  33  ;  xviii.  18. 

3  1  Sam.  ii.  18  ;  xxii.  18 ;  2  Sam.  vi.  14.;  Ex.  xxviii.  6  ff. 

4  Jud.  viii.  27  ;  xvii.  5 ;  xviii.  14,  18,  20  ;  1  Sam.  xxi.  9  ;  xxiii.  6  ; 
Hos,  iii.  4. 

sReuss  on  the  passages  cited,  and  Gesch.,  §  139;  Vatke,  Bibl. 
TheoL,  pp.  267  ff.  ;  [Montefiore,  Hibbert  Lectures,  1892,  pp.  43, 
67,  69]. 

6  Gen.  xxiv.  14  ff.  '  Jud.  vi.  17  ff.,  36  ff. 


20  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

do.  It  was  such  a  sign  by  means  of  which  Gideon 
knew  who  were  the  men  that  he  was  to  select  to  con- 
tend with  the  Midianites,^  and  obtained  the  assurance 
that  Jehovah  had  delivered  the  hostile  camp  into  his 
hands  ;  ^  such  a  sign  also  notified  David  of  the  moment 
when  Jehovah  would  march  before  him  to  smite  the 
Philistines.^ 

We  might  mention,  further,  among  the  usages  of 
this  kind,  necromancy,  which  is  also  found  employed 
by  other  peoples  of  antiquity.*  We  learn  from  1  Sam. 
xxviii.  that,  toward  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Saul,  when 
Jehovah  no  longer  answered  the  king  by  dreams,  or  by 
urim^  or  by  the  prophets,  the  king  betook  himself  to  a 
woman  of  Endor,  who  summoned  the  dead,  that  she 
might  cause  Samuel  to  rise  before  him;  and  this,  accord- 
ing to  the  narrative,  actually  took  place.  From  the 
same  passage  we  learn  that  Saul  had  previously  ban- 
ished necromancers  from  the  country,  which  proves 
that  anciently  this  means  of  divination  was  employed 
in  Israel.  Finally,  we  see  that  the  editor  of  our  narra- 
tive believed  in  the  possibility  of  summoning  the  dead 
and  obtaining  through  them  knowledge  of  the  future. 
In  later  times  this  means  of  divination  again  came  into 
use.^ 

1  Jad.  vii.  4  ff.  2  j^d.  vii.  9  ff.  »  2  Sam.  v.  23-25. 

*  Winer,  art.  ToUenheschwbrer ;  [Smith,  Dictionary  of  the  Bible, 
art.  Divination\. 

^  2  Kings  xxi  6.  ;  xxiii.  24  ;  comp.  Isa.  viii.  19 ;  xxix.  4  ;  Deut. 
xvHi.  11  ;  Lev.  xix.  31 ;  xx.  6,  27. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  3.    THE  IDEA  OF   GOD.  21 

§  3.     THE  IDEA   OP  GOD. 

This  idea  is  fundamental  in  the  Israeli tish  as  in  every 
other  religion.  In  order  to  find  a  safe  point  of  departure 
for  it,  we  shall  begin  by  considering  the  religious 
thoughts  that  are  expressed  in  the  song  of  Deborah. 
It  is  generally  admitted  that  this  passage  is  the  oldest 
document  of  any  importance  in  Hebrew  literature  that 
has  been  preserved  to  us,  and  that  it  dates  from  the 
very  epoch  to  which  it  relates. 

In  this  poem,  Jehovah  is  called  the  God  of  Israel,^ 
and  Israel  the  people  of  Jehovah.^  The  victory  of 
Israel  is  due  to  Jehovah,  who,  for  this  reason,  is  exalted 
by  our  song.^  The  cause  of  Israel  is  the  cause  of  Jeho- 
vah, the  enemies  of  the  one  are  the  enemies  of  the  other, 
the  succor  lent  to  Israel  is  lent  to  Jehovah.*  Jehovah 
is  regarded  as  dwelling  on  Sinai,  whence  he  comes 
across  the  Southland  to  succor  his  people,  making  the 
earth  and  the  heavens  tremble.^ 

The  thought  that  Jehovah  is  the  God  of  Israel,  is 
here  expressed  with  a  conviction  so  firm,  that  it  cannot 
be  of  recent  date,  but  must  certainly  go  back  as  far  as 
Moses,  if  not  farther.  The  first  words  of  the  decalogue  : 
"  I  am  Jehovah  thy  God,  who  caused  thee  to  go  forth 
from  the  land  of  Egypt,  from  the  house  of  bondage  ; 
thou  shalt  not  have  other  gods  before  my  face  "  —  these 
words,  which  contain  the  fundamental  law  of  Israel, 
may,  then,  well  be  Mosaic.  The  same  may  be  said  of 
the  theocratic  idea,  which  constitutes  the  essence  of  the 
religion  of  Israel,  the  idea  that  Jehovah  is  the  veritable 

1  Jud.  V.  3,  5.  2  ^,  11.  .  3  ^^.  2  f.,  9,  11,  13. 

4  vv,  23,  31.  5  vv.  4  f. 


22       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

king  of  his  people,  and  that  he  directs  all  that  concerns 
them ;  for  it  is  implied  in  this  declaration  of  the  deca- 
logue, and  it  is  an  evident  inference  from  the  song  of 
Deborah.  When  Gideon  declines  the  crown,  saying  to 
his  fellow-citizens,  ''  Jehovah  shall  be  your  king "  ^  he 
tliereby  announces  a  Mosaic  principle.  Samuel  also 
conforms  to  this  principle  when  he  opposes  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  monarchy  in  Israel.^  The  words  put 
into  the  mouth  of  Jehovah  and  addressed  to  Samuel : 
"  It  is  not  thou  whom  they  reject ;  it  is  I  whom  they 
reject,  that  I  may  no  longer  reign  over  them,"  admirably 
describe  this  ancient  point  of  view. 

Though  this  idea,  that  Jehovah  alone  is  the  God  of 
Israel,  and  that  the  Israelites  should  not  worship  other 
gods,  can  be  traced  to  Moses,  we  cannot  place  the  date 
of  absolute  monotheism  so  early.  It  certainly  did  not 
appear  in  Israel  until  much  later.  We  see,  indeed,  that 
not  only  the  people,  but  the  kings,  even  Solomon  him- 
self, who  had  had  a  temple  built  for  Jehovah,  were  de- 
voted to  the  worship  of  strange  gods,  or  favored  it. 
This  proves  that  they  attributed  a  real  existence  to  these 
gods.  We  know,  moreover,  that,  in  antiquity,  a  people 
that  had  frequent  intercourse  with  other  peoples  readily 
adopted,  besides  its  national  god  or  gods,  the  god  or 
gods  of  a  friendly  nation,  or  a  nation  that  had  conquered 
them,  or  that  they  themselves  had  reduced  to  submis- 
sion. The  Israelites,  in  following  this  custom,  did  not 
mean  to  desert  Jehovah,  nor  did  they  wish  to  be  un- 
faithful to  him ;  they  merely  associated  with  him  other 
gods,  practised  what  has  properly  been  called  syncretism. 
Though  the  sacred  authors  of  a  later  epoch,  taking  the 
1  J»d.  viii.  23.  2  1  gam.  viii. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  3.    THE   IDEA   OF   GOD.  23 

point  of  view  of  pure  or  absolute  monotheism,  very 
severely  reprobated  this  way  of  thinking  and  acting,  the 
early  Israelites  doubtless  judged  otherwise  concerning 
it,  because  they  did  not  see  in  foreign  gods  purely  imag- 
inary beings,  least  of  all  abominations,  as  they  were 
afterwards  called,  but  real  gods  as  able  as  Jehovah  to 
protect  and  bless  their  worshippers. 

We  see  that  the  most  faithful  Israelites  shared  these 
ideas.  Thus  Jacob  seems  astonished  at  the  presence  of 
Jehovah  on  a  foreign  soil.^  He  promises  to  take  him 
for  his  God  if  he  will  grant  him  protection.^  This 
implies  the  possibility  of  a  different  choice  and  the  exist- 
ence of  other  gods.  When,  at  a  later  date,  this  style 
of  thought  was  attributed  to  the  patriarchs,  the  most 
enlightened  in  Israel  had  evidently  not  passed  this 
point  of  view.^  This  is  proven  by  several  other  notable 
examples.  Thus  Jephthah  recognizes  the  actual  exist- 
ence of  Chemosh,  the  god  of  the  Moabites.*  Joash, 
the  father  of  Gideon,  says :  "  If  Baal  is  a  god,  let  him 
plead  his  own  cause,  since  his  altar  has  been  over- 
thrown."^ If,  by  this  speech,  Joash  does  not  seem 
exactly  to  recognize  in  Baal  a  god,  he  at  least  admits 
the  possibility  that  there  may  be  other  gods  than  Jeho- 
vah. David  himself  seems  to  believe,  with  his  contem- 
poraries, that  it  is  not  Jehovah,  but  other  gods,  who 
rule,  and  can  be  worshipped  outside  the  land  of  Canaan.^ 
He  conveys  the  thought  that  the  God  of  Israel  is  a 

1  Gen.  xxviii.  16.  2  Qen.  xxviii.  20  ff. 

3  Baudissin,  Studien  zur  semitischen  Beligionsgesch.,  I.  pp.  61, 157  f.; 
[W.  R.  Smith,  Prophets  of  Israel,  pp.  53  ff. ;  Montefiore,  Lectures, 
pp.  .34  ff.]. 

*  Jud.  xi.  24  ;  comp.  Num.  xxi.  29. 

5  Jud.  vi.  31.  6  1  Sam.  xxvi.  19  t 


24  THEOLOGY  OF  THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

national  God.^  Naaman  thinks  that  he  must  carry  to 
Syria  some  of  the  soil  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  in  order 
to  be  able  to  rear  an  altar  in  honor  of  Jehovah ;  ^  '•'•  he 
feels  himself  in  the  domain  of  Jehovah  only  on  the  soil 
of  the  land  of  Israel,"  ^  and  Elisha  seems  to  agree  with 
him,  since  he  makes  no  objection.  Naomi  and  Ruth 
think  that,  in  the  land  of  Moab,  one  must,  of  necessity, 
serve  the  gods  of  the  Moabites,  as  the  God  of  Israel  is 
served  in  the  land  of  Canaan.* 

The  existence  of  foreign  gods  is  also  doubtless  pre- 
supposed in  the  old  passages  that  forbid  the  worship  of 
these  gods,  like  Ex.  xx.  2  f .,  and  in  those  that  assert  that 
Jehovah  is  greater  than  they,  like  Ex.  xv.  11.^  In  the 
old  documents  the  expressions  that  designate  Jehovah 
as  a  peculiar  God,  especially  the  name  "  God  of  the 
Hebrews,"  ^  also  seem  to  imply  the  thought  that  he  is  a 
purely  national  God.''' 

Schultz  says,  and  justly,  that  on  account  of  the  potent 
realism  of  antiquity,  the  first  impression  could  not  have 
been  that  the  foreign  gods  were  only  products  of  the 
imagination ;  that  it  is  entirely  natural  that  the  gods  of 
the  gentile  world  should  at  first  be  placed  side  by  side 
with  the  God  of  Israel.  He  adds,  that  it  must  never  be 
forgotten  that  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
purely  practical ;  that  it  is  not  intended  first  of  all  to 
give  instruction  concerning  the  celestial  world,  but  to 
waken  the  conviction  that  salvation  is  to  be  found  only 
in  the  God  of  the  covenant  and  in  the  covenant  with 

1  1  Sam.  xvii.  46.  2  2  Kings  v.  17.  ^  Baudissin,  I.  p.  46. 

*  Ruth  i.  15  ff. ;  ii.  12.       ^  Baudissin,  I.  pp.  66  ff.,  79. 

6  See  especially  Ex.  iii.  18 ;  vii.  16. 

7  Baudissin,  I.  pp.  156  f. ;  [Schultz,  Theology,  I.  pp.  178  f.]. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  3.    THE   IDEA   OF    GOD.  25 

him;  that  its  first  task  is  to  teach,  not  that  there  can- 
not be  any  other  deities  besides  the  God  of  Israel,  but 
that  Israel  must  have  none  besides  him.^ 

If  the  ancient  Israelites  had  not  yet  attained  to  abso- 
lute monotheism,  they  had  just  as  little  conception  of 
the  idea  of  the  perfect  spirituality  of  God.  They  repre- 
sented him  to  themselves,  on  the  contrary,  under  the 
form  of  man.  According  to  the  biblical  narratives,  God 
visits  Abraham  with  two  companions  ;  he  accepts  the 
hospitality  that  the  patriarch  offers  him ;  he  converses 
with  him  and  Sarah,  then  goes  away  toward  Sodom,  ac- 
companied by  his  host,  to  whom,  on  the  way,  he  makes 
known  his  purpose  to  destroy  the  guilty  cities. ^  He 
forms  man  out  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  as  any  artist 
would  do;  he  breathes  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life  ; 
he  plants  a  garden  in  Eden  ;  he  takes  a  rib  of  the  man  to 
make  the  woman,  and  carefully  closes  up  the  flesh  in 
place  of  it ;  he  rests  from  the  work  of  creation  when  he 
has  finished  it.^  After  the  fall  he  appears  in  the  garden 
of  Eden ;  he  walks  through  it;  he  calls  Adam  and  Eve  ; 
he  informs  them  of  the  penalties  that  will  overtake 
them  ;  then  he  makes  them  garments  of  skin  and  clothes 
them.*  He  closes  the  door  of  the  ark  upon  Noah.^  He 
smells  the  pleasant  odor  of  the  burnt-offering  that  the 
latter  offers  him.^  He  engages  in  a  hand-to-hand  con- 
flict, like  a  man,  with  Jacob.^  He  attacks  Moses  in  the 
night,  and  attempts  to  kill  him;^  he  speaks  to  him  as 
one  person  speaks  to  another ;  ^  he  buries  him  after  his 

1  Theology,  I.  pp.  181  f. ;  comp.  Baudissin,  I.  pp.  156,  175. 

2  Gen.  xviii.  f.  s  Qen.  ii.  7  f.;  21  1,  3.  *  Gen.  iii.  8-20. 

6  Gen.  vii.  16.  ^  Gen.  viii.  21.  '^  Gen.  xxxii.  24  ff. 

8  Ex.  iv.  24.  9  Ex.  xxxiii,  11  ;  Num.  xii.  8. 


26       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

death ;  ^  he  j)ronounces  the  ten  words  of  the  decalogue,^ 
and  engraves  them  on  tables  of  stone.^  He  raises  his 
hand  to  take  an  oath.^  It  is  only  necessary  to  read  a 
few  pages  of  the  prophets  or  the  Psalms  to  be  convinced 
that  God  is  regarded  as  possessing  all  the  members  and 
functions  of  the  human  body.  He  is  even  said  to  hiss,^ 
to  cry,^  to  laugh,*"  to  sleep  and  awake.^ 

It  is  clear  that  in  the  prophets  and  the  Psalms  these 
expressions  belong  to  the  poetic  style.  But  originally, 
and  even  at  a  later  date  in  the  mouth  of  the  people,  they 
were  not  merely  rhetorical;  they  corresponded  to  the 
imperfect  ideas  that  were  current  respecting  the  Deity. 
When  the  narratives  of  the  Pentateuch,  from  which  we 
have  taken  the  examples  above  cited,  were  composed, 
they  were  certainly  taken  in  their  literal  signification. 
We  think  that  even  at  the  time  when  the  original  nar- 
rators borrowed  them  from  popular  tradition  to  stereo- 
type them  in  writing,  they  w^ere  still  generally  taken  in 
this  sense. 

Since  God  was  represented  under  the  human  form,  it 
was  natural  to  put  him  into  a  certain  place.  According 
to  the  whole  Old  Testament,  God  dwells  in  heaven, 
whence  he  observes  what  happens  on  the  earth,  and 
whence  he  descends  to  do  what  he  does  among  men. 
Later,  the  ideas  on  this  subject  were  comparatively 
enlightened ;  but  in  ancient  times,  as  several  stories 
prove,  the  current  conception  was  rather  gross.  Thus 
Jehovah  comes  down  to  see  the  city  and  the  tower  of 

1  Deut.  xxxiv.  6.  2  Ex,  xx.  1  ff.  ^  ex.  xxxii.  16  ;  xxxiv.  1. 

*  Ex.  vi.  8  ;  Num.  xiv.  30  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  40. 

6  Isa.  V.  26  ;  vii.  18.       e  jga.  xlii.  13  f. ;  Jer.  xxv.  30. 

7  Ps.  ii.  4  ;  lix.  8.  8  pg.  xliv.  23  ;  Ixxviii.  65. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  3.    THE  IDEA  OF   GOD.  27 

Babel,  that  the  children  of  men  are  building ;  he  says, 
''  Come,  let  us  go  down  and  confound  their  speech."  ^ 
In  view  of  the  corruption  of  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah,  he  says :  "  I  will  go  down  and  see  if 
they  have  acted  altogether  according  to  the  report  that 
hath  come  to  me,  and  if  it  is  not  so,  I  shall  know  it."  ^ 
He  appears  to  Moses  and  declares  to  him  that  he  has 
come  down  to  deliver  his  people  from  the  hand  of  the 
Egyptians,  and  to  bring  them  into  the  land  of  Canaan.^ 
When  the  law  is  promulgated,  he  comes  down  upon 
Mount  Sinai.*  And  these  are  not  the  only  instances  of 
this  kind.^ 

We  know  that,  according  to  the  whole  Old  Testa- 
ment, Jehovah  is  regarded  as  dwelling  in  the  midst  of 
his  people,  and  more  especially  in  the  sanctuary.  This 
was  only  another  way  of  localizing  him.  This  idea, 
which  was  later  spiritualized,  was  in  ancient  times  cer- 
tainly very  grossly  conceived.  According  to  a  passage 
of  the  song  of  Deborah  already  cited,  Sinai  was  origi- 
nally considered  the  peculiar  abode  of  the  God  of  Israel ; 
the  same  opinion  recurs  in  other  passages,  especially 
in  the  twenty-fourth  chapter  of  Exodus,  where  we  see 
Moses  and  his  companions  ascending  Sinai  to  draw  near 
to  Jehovah. 

Other  imperfections,  the  imperfect  affections  and  sen- 
timents of  the  human  soul,  were  attributed  to  God. 
He  is  seized  with  jealousy  on  seeing  men  exalting  them- 
selves above  their  ordinary  condition,  and  he  feels  him- 
self obliged  to  oppose  their  proud  designs,  in  order  to 

1  Gen.  xi.  5,  7.  2  Gen.  xviii.  21.  3  Ex.  iii.  8. 

*  Ex.  xix.  9,  11,  18,  20  ;  comp.  xxxiv.  5. 

5  Num.  xi.  17,  25  ;  xii.  5 ;  xxii.  9,  20  ;  xxiii.  3  f .,  16. 


28  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

maintain  the  separation  that  exists  between  him  and 
them.i  He  is  obliged  to  put  Abraham  to  the  proof,  in 
order  to  learn  that  he  is  faithful  to  him.^  In  all  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  there  are  references  to 
oaths  of  God,  to  repentance  on  his  part,  to  his  jealousy, 
to  his  anger,  to  his  vengeance.  But  moral  imperfections, 
even  more  shocking,  were  attributed  to  him.  It  is  related 
that  he  incited  Moses  and  the  Israelites  to  cheat  and  rob 
the  Eg3q3tians,  and  that  he  assisted  them  in  this  at- 
tempt.^ Nowhere  in  antiquity  was  there  any  obligation 
felt  toward  strangers,  least  of  all  toward  enemies.  Je- 
hovah, therefore,  inasmuch  as  he  was  regarded  as 
exclusively  or  especially  the  national  God  of  Israel,  had, 
it  was  thought,  no  actual  obligations  toward  the  enemies 
of  Israel. 

Certain  primitive  usages  show  us  that  as  the  ancient 
Israelites  did  not  regard  God  as  a  pure  spirit,  neither 
did  they  know  how  to  worship  him  in  spirit.  We  shall 
see  farther  on  how  important  was  the  part  played  by 
external  observances  in  Israel,  and  particularly  by  the 
sacred  ark,  whose  presence  was  identified  with  that  of 
Jehovah  himself.  There  were  other  objects  of  worship 
with  reference  to  which  superstitious  ideas  were  current. 

The  teraphim,  which  we  find  even  in  the  family  of  the 
patriarchs,^  reappear  in  the  house  of  David  ^  and  else- 
where, and  the  worshippers  of  Jehovah  ascribed  to  tliem 
great  value,  as  well  as  to  other  sacred  statues  and 
images,  among   which   must   be   reckoned   the   ephod, 

1  Gen.  iii.  22  ;  xi.  6  f . 

2  Gen.  xxii.  1  ff.,  12 ;  comp.  Ex.  xv.  25 ;  xx.  20. 

3  Ex.  iii.  18,  22  ;  xi.  2  f.  ;  xii.  35  f. 

4  Gen.  xxxi.  19,  .30  ff.  ^  i  Sam.  xix.  13,  16. 


FIRST   PERIOD. —§  4.    COVENANT   OF  JEHOVAH.      29 

mentioned  in  the  same  connection  and  placed  upon  the 
same  level.^  The  worship  of  the  brazen  serpent  was 
also  long  continued  in  Israel,  and  finally  condemned  as 
idolatry ;  ^  it  was  the  same  with  the  calves  prepared  in 
honor  of  Jehovah.  This  is  the  way  in  which  these  last 
are  represented,  Ex.  xxxii.  4  f.  Jeroboam  also  doubt- 
less set  up  the  two  calves  at  Bethel  and  Dan  in  honor 
of  Jehovah,  although  it  was  later  regarded  only  as  an 
act  of  idolatry.^ 

If,  as  we  saw  at  the  beginning  of  this  paragraph,  one 
may  say  that  the  first  commandment  of  the  decalogue 
may  be  Mosaic,  we  now  see,  at  the  end  of  it,  that 
one  may  seriously  doubt  whether  the  second,  which 
absolutely  forbids  the  worship  of  images,  can  be  so 
ancient.  For  even  a  David  had  sacred  images  in  his 
house,  and  used  them  in  consulting  Jehovah,  which 
would  be  inexplicable  if,  in  his  day,  the  second  com- 
mandment was  a  fundamental  law  of  the  religion  of 
Israel. 

§  4.    THE  COVENANT  OF  JEHOVAH  WITH  ISEAEL. 

In  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  Genesis,  document  A  re- 
lates how  Jehovah  made  a  covenant  with  Abraham,  the 
father  of  the  faithful.  Farther  on  it  tells  how  the  cove- 
nant between  Jehovah  and  the  people  Israel  was 
solemnly  confirmed  through  the  mediation  of  Moses  at 
Sinai.*       The    detailed   explanation   of   this   important 

1  Jud.  xvii.  5 ;  xviii.  14  ff.,  30.  ;  viii.  27  ;  Hos.  iii.  4 ;  comp.  Zecli. 
X.  2  ;  2  Kings  xxiii.  24. 

2  Num.  xxi.  5  ff.  ;  2  Kings  xviii.  4. 

3  1  Kings  xii.  28  ff. ;  2  Kings  x.  29 ;  xvii.  16  ;  comp.  Hos.  viii.  5  f.; 
X.  5.  *  Ex.  xix.  -xxiv. 


30       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

point,  taken  from  one  of  the  sources,  is  followed  by  a 
second  and  briefer  one,  derived  from  another  source.^ 

It  should  be  noticed  that  we  have  here  very  old  por- 
tions of  document  A,  based  perhaps  on  written  docu- 
ments still  older,  at  all  events  on  ancient  traditions.  The 
idea  of  the  covenant  between  Jehovah  and  Israel  is  of 
very  ancient  date.  It  is  certainly  as  old  as  Moses,  the 
founder  of  the  Israelitish  theocracy,  since  there  is  no 
later  epoch  to  be  found  at  which  it  could  have  arisen. ^ 
In  the  book  of  Judges,  and  those  of  Samuel,  even  in  the 
oldest  passages  that  they  contain,  like  the  song  of  Debo- 
rah, Jehovah  is  everywhere  regarded  as  the  God  of 
Israel,  and  Israel  as  the  people  of  Jehovah.  This  idea 
is  found,  from  the  start,  as  a  fundamental  feature  of  the 
teaching  of  the  prophets.  It  appears  on  every  page 
of  the  Old  Testament.  We  must,  then,  even  in  this 
period,  show  in  what  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  Avith 
Israel  consists,  and  what  are  its  essential  characteristics. 

On  the  part  of  Jehovah,  the  covenant  with  Israel  is 
simply  a  gratuitous  favor,  a  free  and  spontaneous  act. 
It  is  Jehovah  who  takes  the  initiative  in  it,  and  not 
Israel.  According  even  to  document  A,  God  caused  the 
children  of  Israel  to  be  told  at  the  time  when  he  made 
a  covenant  with  them,  that,  while  the  whole  earth  be- 
longed to  him,  he  took  them  from  among  all  the  peoples 
of  the  earth  that  he  might  make  them  his  peculiar  peo- 
ple.^ But  the  gratuitousness  of  this  favor  is  even  more 
strongly  emphasized  in  Deuteronomy.* 

1  Ex.  xxxiv.  10-28. 

2  Reuss,  Gesch.,  §  69  ;  Vatke,  pp.  184  ff.,  238;  [Kuenen,  Beligion  of 
Israel,  I.  pp.  292  f.]. 

3  Ex.  xix.  5.  4  iv.  37  f.  :  vii.  6-viii.  8,  17  f.  ;  x.  14  f. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  4.    COVENANT    OF   JEHOVAH.     31 

The  relations  established  between  Jehovah  and  his 
people  as  the  result  of  this  covenant  are  described  in 
various  ways.  First  of  all,  this  people  thus  becomes  the 
people  of  Jehovah,  his  property,^  his  inheritance,^  over 
which  he  wishes  to  rule  as  master,  as  king.^  Oehler 
justly  remarks  that  when  Jehovah,  in  making  a  cove- 
nant with  Israel,  requires  that  they  be  a  holy  people 
and  a  kingdom  of  priests,  this  implies  the  thought  that 
the  people  Israel  must  be  separated  from  all  the  other 
peoples,  and  that  they  must  be  consecrated  to  him,  be- 
long to  him.*  There  are  passages  of  document  A  and 
of  others  that  express  this  thought  with  great  pre- 
cision,^ a  thought  which  is  the  essence  of  the  term 
sanctity  when  it  is  applied  to  men  and  things  in  the 
Old  Testament.^  Mention  should  also  be  made  of  the 
fact  that  Israel  was  prohibited  from  making  covenants 
with  the  other  peoples." 

The  relation  between  Jehovah  and  Israel,  by  virtue  of 
their  covenant,  is  secondly  regarded  as  that  between 
a  father  and  his  children.  Jehovah  is  the  father  of  the 
people,  inasmuch  as  he  has  conquered,  formed,  created 
them,  or  will  do  so  to  them  in  the  future.^     Jehovah  is 

1  Jud.  V.  11 ;  Ex.  XV.  16  ;  xix.  5  f .  ;  vi.  7  ;  Num.  xvi.  41  ;  Deut,  vii. 
6 ;  xiv.  2 ;  xxvi.  18. 

2  Ex.  xxxiv.  9  ;  1  Sam,  x.  1 ;  2  Sam.  xiv.  16 ;  xx.  19  ;  xxi.  3  ;  Mic. 
vii.  14,  18  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  9 ;  iv.  20  ;  ix.  26,  29,  etc. 

3  Deut.  xxxiii.  5  ;  Jud.  viii.  23  ;  1  Sam.  viii.  5-7  ;  Mic.  ii.  13  ;  iv.  7  ; 
Isa.  vi.  5  ;  xxxiii,  22,  etc.  *  §  82. 

s  Ex.  xix.  4-6  ;  xxii.  31  ;  Lev.  xx.  24-26  ;  Deut.  vii.  6  ;  xiv.  2 ; 
xxvi.  18  f. 

6  Baudissin,  II.  pp.  40  ff.,  61  ff.  ;  [W.  R.  Smith,  Prophets,  pp.224ff.]. 

"^  Ex.  xxiii.  32  ;  xxxiv,  11  f. ;  Deut.  vii.  1  ff. 

8  Deut.  xxxii.  6 ;  Jer.  iii.  4,  19 ;  xxxi.  9  ;  Isa.  Ixiii.  16 ;  Ixiv.  8 ; 
Mai.  i.  6  :  ii.  10. 


32       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

often  said  to  have  borne  his  people,  to  have  formed 
and  created  them.^  This  he  did  when  he  brought 
Israel,  his  son,  from  bondage  in  Egypt,^  then  after  this 
painful  delivery,  when  he  nourished  and  reared  him.^ 
By  bearing  and  forming  his  people,  Jehovah  acquired 
a  right  to  them  as  a  father  acquires  one  to  a  son,  a 
favorite,  a  first-born  son.* 

In  a  third  series  of  passages,  the  relation  existing 
between  Jehovah  and  Israel  is  compared  with  the  con- 
jugal tie,  Jehovah  being  the  husband,  and  Israel  the 
wife  —  unfortunately  very  often  an  unfaithful  wife,  whom 
the  husband  may  accuse  of  unfaithfulness,  adultery, 
prostitution,  and  whom  he  has  the  right  to  divorce.^  In 
numerous  passages,  idolatry,  the  worship  of  foreign 
gods,  consisting  in  giving  one's  self  to  these  gods 
and  being  unfaithful  to  Jehovah,  is  treated  as  prosti- 
tution.^ 

Finally,  there  are  passages  in  which  the  Israelites  are 
individually  called  the  servants  of  Jehovah,"  and  others 
in  which  Israel  is  collectively  regarded  as  the  servant 
of  the  God,  who  chose  them  for  his  peculiar  people.^ 
Jehovah  is  also  generally  addressed  as  the  Lord. 

The  various    relations    established  between  Jehovah 

1  Deut.  xxxii.  18 ;  Hos.  viii.  14 ;  Isa.  xliii.  1,  7,  15,  21 ;  etc. 

2  Ex.  iv.  22  f .  ;  Hos.  xi.  1  ;  comp.  xii.  9  ;  xiii.  4. 

3  Hos.  xi.  3  ;  Isa.  i.  2  ;  xlvi.  3  ;  Deut.  i.  31  ;  viii.  5. 
*  Ex.  iv.  22  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  9,  20 ;  comp.  Hos.  i.  10. 

5  Hos.  i.-iii.  ;  Jer.  ii.  20 ;  iii.  1,  8,  20 ;  Ezek.  xvi. ;  xxiii.  ;  Isa.  liv. 
5  f.  ;  Ixii.  5. 

6  Ex.  xxxiv.  15  f. ;  Jud.  ii.  17  ;  Hos.  iv.  15  ;  v.  3  f.  ;  vi.  10 ;  ix.  1 ; 
Jer.  ii.  23-25  ;  iii.  8  ff.  ;  xiii.  27  ;  etc. 

7  Deut.  xxxii.  36,  43  ;  Lev.  xxv.  42,  55 ;  1  Kings  viii.  32,  36 ;  etc. 

8  Jer.  XXX.  10  ;  xlvi.  27  f .  ;  Eze.  xxviii.  25 ;  xxxvii.  25 ;  Isa.  xli. 
8  f.  ;  xiii.  19  ;  xliii.  10 ;  etc. 


FIKST   PERIOD.  —  §  4.    COVENANT   OF   JEHOVAH.     33 

and  Israel  imply,  on  the  part  of  God,  authority,  inas- 
much as  he  is  king,  father,  husband,  and  lord  of  Israel ; 
they  imply  also  his  love  and  faithfulness.  The  condi- 
tion of  Israel,  as  people,  son,  wife,  and  servant  of  Jeho- 
vah, on  the  other  hand,  implies  respectful,  docile, 
humble  obedience,  as  well  as  gratitude,  love,  and  faith- 
fulness. These  respective  rights  and  duties  of  Jehovah 
and  his  people  are  expressed  in  a  great  variety  of  forms, 
which  will  be  considered  hereafter. 

While  we  are  discussing  the  essential  characteristics 
of  the  old  covenant,  we  must  further  remark  that  this 
covenant  concerns  the  people  Israel  as  a  people.  The 
individual  is  almost  completely  overshadowed  by  the 
nation.  Nothing  is  more  foreign  to  the  general  tone  of 
the  Old  Testament  than  our  modern  individualism. 
One  became  a  member  of  the  old  covenant,  not  by  per- 
sonal adherence,  but  by  birth,  by  descent  from  the 
fathers,  and  by  circumcision. 

This  prime  sacrament  of  the  old  covenant,  being 
bestowed  only  upon  male  children,  evidently  implies 
a  superiority  of  men  over  women ;  the  true  Israel  is 
composed  of  the  stronger  sex.  Heads  of  families  played 
the  leading  part.  That  a  family  should  be  Israelite,  it 
was  only  essential  that  its  head  should  be  such;  its 
other  members  were  of  only  secondary  importance  in 
all  respects,  and  therefore  also  in  matters  of  religion. 

Individualism,  however,  finds  partial  satisfaction  in 
the  conditions  and  obligations  that  every  Israelite  must 
fulfil  in  order  to  partake  in  the  benefits  of  the  covenant, 
in  the  privileges  granted  by  Jehovah  to  his  people. 
These  conditions  and  obligations,  which  the  people 
Israel  had  to  agree  faithfully  to  fulfil,  when  Jehovah 


34  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

made  a  covenant  with  tliem,^  we  shall  have  to  discuss 
more  in  detail  in  various  parts  of  our  work. 

The  above  discussion  shows  that  the  covenant  be- 
tween Jehovah  and  Israel  has  justly  been  called  a  syn- 
allagmatic contract,  implying  reciprocal  obligations 
between  the  two  contracting  parties,  faithfulness  on  the 
part  of  God,  who  chose  his  people  out  of  sheer  grace,  as 
well  as  on  the  part  of  the  people  graciously  chosen. 
Hence  the  essentially  moral  basis  of  the  old  covenant, 
and  its  superiority  over  all  the  other  religions  of  an- 
tiquity. This  covenant,  also,  in  spite  of  its  particu- 
larism, and  all  the  imperfections  that  it  contained,  was 
capable  of  remarkable  development,  and  of  final  comple- 
tion in  the  new  covenant  established  by  the  gospel. 


§  5.     ETHICAL  LIFE. 

If  we  wish  to  describe  the  ethical  ideal  that  was 
formed  in  our  period,  we  have  only  to  allow  ourselves 
to  be  guided  by  the  oldest  legislation.  But  we  may 
also  take  into  account  the  great  figures,  more  or  less 
idealized,  of  the  patriarchal  and  the  following  epochs, 
as  they  are  represented  in  the  oldest  documents ;  for 
they  bear  the  visible  stamp  of  ancient  Israelitish 
morals  ;  are,  as  it  were,  the  reflex  of  them. 

The  most  perfect  portrait  of  the  patriarchal  epoch  is 
that  of  Abraham.  It  is  evident  that  to  this  father  of 
the  people  Israel,  with  whom  God  made  the  first  special 
covenant,  were  attributed  all  the  virtues  of  a  true  Israelite. 
Abraham,  it  is  said,  observed  all  the  commands  of  God,^ 

1  Ex.  xix.  5-8  ;  xxiv.  3,  7.  2  Gen.  xxvi.  5. 


FLRST   PERIOD.  —  §  5.    ETHICAL   LIFE.  35 

commanded  his  house  to  keep  the  way  of  Jehovah,  to 
practise  justice.^  He  is  a  perfect  model  of  confidence 
in  God  and  obedience  to  him.^  In  his  relations  with 
his  equals  he  shows  a  spirit  of  peace,  charity,  and  disin- 
terestedness.^ He  gives  proof  of  courage  when  he  is 
called  upon  to  succor  a  brother ;  ^  he  practises  hospital- 
ity toward  strangers;^  he  shows  compassion  for  the 
inhabitants  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  when  they  are 
threatened  with  destruction.^ 

Next  to  Abraham,  David  is  the  most  ideal  figure  of 
the  Old  Testament,  the  model  for  kings  after  God's 
own  heart,  the  type  of  the  Messiah,  of  the  perfect 
king  of  the  glorious  era  of  the  last  days.  Even  as  a 
young  man,  he  seems  animated  by  the  most  complete 
confidence  in  God."  He  is  submissive  to  Jehovah  and 
filled  with  a  genuine  spirit  of  prayer.^  He  shows  him- 
self repentant  after  his  faults^  and  grateful  for  the 
favors  of  God.^^  He  is  imbued  with  a  tender  and  faith- 
ful friendship  for  Jonathan. ^^  He  gives  proof  of  gen- 
erosity toward  Saul,  his  enemy,  and  of  reverence  for 
the  anointed  of  Jehovah.i^  It  is  with  the  profoundest 
sorrow  that  he  hears  of  the  death  of  his  rebellious  son,!^ 
or  sees  the  people  punished  on  his  account.^'^  He  inspires 
his  soldiers  with  the  spirit  of  justice. ^^ 

1  Gen.  xviii.  19.  ^  Gen.  xii.  1  ff.  ;  xv.  6  ;  xxii.  1  ff. 

3  Gen.  xiii.  7-9  ;  comp.  xiv.  21-24. 

*  Gen.  xiv.  13  ff.  ^  Gen.  xviii.  2  ff. ;  comp.  xix.  1  ff. 

6  Gen.  xviii.  23  ff.  '^1  Sam.  xvii.  34  ff.,  45  ff. 

8  2  Sam.  vii.  ;  xv.  25  f.  ;  xvi.  11  ;  xxiv.  14. 

9  2  Sam.  xii.  1-23  ;  xxiv.  10  ff.,  17.  lo  2  Sam.  xxii. 

11  1  Sam.  xviii.  3  ;  xx.  8,  16,  42  ;  xxiii.  16-18 ;  2  Sam.  i.  26. 

12  1  Sam.  xxiv.  ;  xxvi.  ^^  2  Sam.  xix.  1  ff. 

1*  2  Sam.  xxiv.  17,  ^^  1  Sam.  xxx.  21-25. 


36       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

This  ethical  ideal  of  the  ancient  Israelites  is,  how- 
ever, far  from  perfect.  The  patriarchs  use  deception 
toward  the  stranger,  as  if  it  were  a  lawful  practice.^ 
Polygamy  is  not  considered  an  evil,^  nor  intemperance 
in  eating  and  drinking  a  vice.^  Great  license  in  morals 
is  tolerated.*  Barbarity  is  practised  in  war,  and  gener- 
ally toward  adversaries,  as  the  case  of  David  himself 
proves.^     Suicide  does  not  appear  culpable.^ 

In  spite  of  polygamy,  which  was  freely  practised, 
marriage  was  regarded  with  profound  respect,^  and 
w^oman  was  greatly  honored;  it  is  only  necessary  to 
recall  the  fact  that  from  remote  antiquity  there  were 
prophetesses  to  be  found  in  Israel.^  According  to  Gen. 
xxiv.  the  relations  between  masters  and  servants  were 
excellent. 

We  pass  now  to  the  oldest  legal  fragments ;  namely, 
Ex.  XX.  -  xxiii.  and  xxxiv.  11-26.  At  the  beginning  of 
the  former  is  found  the  decalogue,  reproduced,  with 
some  variations,  Deut.  v.  It  must  be  very  ancient,  at 
least  in  its  original  tenor.  This  may  be  approximately 
reached  by  removing  the  portions  that  differ,  in  the  two 
recensions,  and  clearly  appear  to  be  later  additions. 
The    decalogue   by  no  means   contains   the   whole    of 

1  Gen.  xii.  12  ff. ;  xx.  1  ff.  ;  xxvi.  7  ff. ;  comp.  xxvii.  6  ff. 

2  Gen.  xvi. ;  xxii.  24  ;  xxv.  6  ;  xxvi.  34  ;  xxviii.  9  ;  xxix.  f . ;  xxxvi. 
2,  12  ;  Jud.  viii.  30. 

3  Gen.  ix.  21,  24  ;  xliii.  34  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  13. 

4  Gen.  xxxviii.  15  ff. ;  Jud.  xvi.  1,  4  ;  comp.  xi.  1. 

5  Jud.  i.  6  ;  iii.  20-22 ;  iv.  17  ff. :  v.  24  ff. ;  viii.  16  f. ;  ix.  5,  49  ; 
xii.  6  ;  xviii.  27  f. ;  xxi.  10  f . ;  1  Sam.  xxv.  10-13  ;  xxxiv.  39  ;  xxvii. 
9  ff.  ;  2  Sam.  iii.  27  ;  viii.  2  ;  xii.  31  ;  1  Kings  ii.  5  f.,  8  f.  ;  xi.  15  f. 

6  Jud.  ix.  54  ;  xvi.  29  ff.  ;  1  Sam.  xxxi.  4  ff. ;  2  Sam.  xvii.  23. 

7  Gen.  xii.  16  ff.  ;  xx.  3  ff. ;  xxvi.  10  f. 

8  Jud.  iv.  4  ;  Ex.  xv.  20  ;  2  Kings  xxii.  14. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  5.    ETHICAL  LIFE.  37 

Christian  ethics  as  certain  modern  catechisms  would 
have  it.  But  even  taken  in  its  literal  sense,  it  is  a 
wonderful  production  for  the  epoch  to  which  it  belongs. 
Its  precepts  are  often  elsewhere  reproduced  in  the  Old 
Testament,  which  clearly  proves  that  we  here  have  to 
do  with  the  fundamental  laws  of  Israel. 

Jehovah  after  having  reminded  his  people  that  he  is 
their  God,  and  that  he  delivered  them  from  bondage  in 
Egypt,  forbids  them  to  worship  other  gods  besides  him.^ 
This  is  the  prime  law  of  the  old  covenant.  The  whole 
Old  Testament  teaches  that  the  greatest  unfaithfulness 
of  which  Israel  could  be  guilty  was  the  abandonment  of 
Jehovah,  to  become  a  devotee  of  idolatry.  The  deca- 
logue forbids,  in  the  second  place,  the  making  of  images 
to  worship.^  The  profanation  of  the  sacred  name  of 
Jehovah  by  taking  a  false  oath,  or  any  bad  use  of  it 
whatever,  is  next  prohibited.-^  These  three  prohibitions 
are  followed  by  two  positive  commands :  one  ordains 
that  the  Sabbath,  the  holiday  par  excellence^  be  sancti- 
fied, kept  sacred,  apart  from  other  days,  and  not  devoted 
to  manual  labor ;  ^  the  other  requires  that  fathers  and 
mothers  be  honored.^  The  place  assigned  to  this  com- 
mand, immediately  after  those  touching  duties  to  God, 
shows  its  importance.  The  remainder  of  the  decalogue 
consists  merely  of  a  series  of  prohibitions.  The  first 
forbids  murder;^  life,  from  the  Israelitish  point  of  view, 
being  the  most  precious  of  blessings.  Next  to  his  life 
man's  greatest  treasure  is  his  wife.'^  This  is  the  reason 
why  the  prohibition  of  murder  is  followed  by  that  of 
adultery.^     Then  comes  the  prohibition  of  theft,  forbid- 

1  Ex.  XX.  2  f .         -  vv.  4  f .        ^  v.l  \  see  Dillmann.        *  vv.  8  ff. 
5  ^.  12.  6  ^.  13.  7  Comp.  Gen.  ii.  2.3  f.        8  Ex.  xx.  14. 


38  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

ding  one  to  lay  one's  hand  upon  the  property  of  a  neigh- 
bor.^ But  one  has  no  more  right  to  do  violence  to  the 
life  or  property  of  one's  neighbor  by  words  than  by  acts. 
Hence  the  prohibition  of  false  testimony,  in  case  of  legal 
proceedings.^  Finally,  since  bad  words  and  actions 
proceed  from  bad  desires,  these  also  are  forbidden.^ 
For  contrary  to  the  supposition  of  many  since  Luther's 
day,  reference  is  here  made  to  covetousness,  and  not 
simply  to  external  but  indirect  means  of  getting  pos- 
session of  others'  goods.* 

There  is  good  reason  for  dividing  the  decalogue  into 
duties  of  piety,  toward  God  and  parents,  and  duties  of 
probity,  toward  neighbors.  The  whole  thing  is  admi- 
rably conceived.  It  begins  with  the  most  exalted  duties, 
those  toward  God,  then  mentions  the  duties  toward 
parents,  and  closes  with  those  toward  other  men.  In 
this  last  series  the  duty  toward  life,  the  most  precious 
of  blessings,  is  found  at  the  beginning,  as  in  the  first 
series,  the  fundamental  duty  toward  God.  Life  and 
woman  deserve  especial  mention  ;  the  other  blessings 
receive  only  secondary  consideration.  There  is  also  in 
these  last  an  admirable  gradation,  in  that  bad  actions 
toward  one's  neighbor  are  first  prohibited,  then  bad 
words,  and  finally  bad  desires. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  pass  in  review  all  the  other 
laws  of  document  A  above  mentioned.  Each  one  can 
make  a  study  of  them  for  himself.  Any  one  who  care- 
fully reads  all  this  primitive  legislation  of  Israel  will 
notice  that  it  is  very  simple ;  that,  like  the  decalogue, 
of  which  it  is  in  part  only  a  development,  it  enjoins 
above  all  the  chief  duties  toward  God  and  one's  neigh- 
1  V.  15.  2  y^  16,  3  ^.  17.  4  See  Dillmann. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  — §6.    WORSHIP.  39 

bor.  The  ceremonial  laws  are  here  neither  numerous 
nor  complicated.  It  is  humanitarian  laws  that  pre- 
dominate. This  legislation  goes  so  far  as  to  enjoin 
kindness  toward  enemies ;  ^  the  lex  talionis  that  it  pro- 
mulgates 2  is  a  juridical  regulation,  and  not  a  rule  for 
the  conduct  of  private  life.  It  also  enjoins  justice 
toward  the  stranger,  charity  toward  the  poor,  fair- 
ness and  mildness  toward  slaves  and  servants,^  and 
even  consideration  for  animals.* 


§  6.    WOESHIP. 

I.   Places  of  Worship. 

Primitively  there  was  great  freedom  in  Israel  in  the 
matter  of  places  of  worship.  The  oldest  documents  of 
the  Pentateuch  also  tell  us  that  the  patriarchs  reared 
altars,  to  sacrifice  to  God  and  call  upon  him,  wherever 
they  happened  to  be.^  Moses  and  Joshua  followed  this 
custom.6  In  the  days  of  the  judges,  the  children  of 
Israel  offer  sacrifices  at  Bokim;^  Gideon  builds  an 
altar  to  Jehovah  at  Ophra ;  ^  he  offers  a  sacrifice  on  a 
rock ;  ^  Manoah  does  the  same  ;  ^^  Micah  has  a  private 
sanctuary.il     At  the  same  time  we  find  sacred  places  at 

1  Ex.  xxiii.  4  f.  ^  ex.  xxi.  23-25. 

3  Ex.  XX.  10  ;  xxi.  1-11 ;  xxii.  21-27  ;  xxiii.  6,  9,  11  f. 

4  Ex.  XX.  10  ;  xxiii.  11  f . 

5  Gen.  viii.  20 ;  xii.  7  f.  ;  xiii.  3  f .,  18 ;  xxi.  33  ;  xxii.  9,  13 ;  xxvi. 
25  ;  xxviii.  18-22  ;  xxxiii.  20 ;  xxxv.  1-3,  7  ;  xlvi.  1. 

6  Ex.  xvii.  15  ;  xviii.  12  ;  xxiv.  4  ;  Deut.  xxvii.  4  ff. ;  Josh.  viii.  30  f. ; 
xxiv.  1,  25  f. 

7  Jud.  ii.  5.  8  jud.  vi.  24.  «  Jud.  vi.  25  ff. 
10  Jud.  xiii.  19.                    ii  Jud.  xvii.  5,  10-13. 


40  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

Mispah,^  Shiloh,2  Betliel,^  and  Gibeali.^  Samuel  offers 
sacrifices  indifferently  at  Mispali,  Ramali,  Gilgal,  and 
Bethlehem.^  Saul  rears  altars  and  offers  sacrifices  at 
various  places.^  From  this  time  until  the  erection  of 
Solomon's  temple,  these  same  sacred  places  and  others 
serve  as  sanctuaries  for  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  David 
and  Solomon  in  this  respect  following  the  traditional 
usage J 

In  some  of  the  passages  cited  the  places  of  worship 
are  called  high  places.  They  were  in  fact  places, 
naturally  or  artificially  raised,  such  as  are  found  among 
Semitic  peoples  generally.^  This  worship  at  high-places 
was  continued  even  after  the  erection  of  the  temple 
under  the  most  faithful  kings .^  The  prophet  Elijah  re- 
builds the  altar  on  Mount  Carmel,  and  offers  sacrifices  on 
it.^^  He  complains  that  numerous  altars  consecrated  to 
Jehovah  in  the  country  have  been  destroyed.^^  Elisha 
allows  Namaan  to  carry  the  soil  of  Canaan  into  Syria,  for 
the  purpose  of  rearing  there  an  altar  and  offering  sacri- 
fices to  Jehovah. ^2  Isaiah  expresses  the  hope  that,  in  the 
future,  the  Egyptians  will  turn  to  Jehovah  and  rear  an 
altar  to  him  in  their  country  and  offer  him  sacrifices.^^ 
It  is  therefore  certain  that  in  Israel  a  multiplicity  of 

1  Jud.  xi.  11  ;  XX.  1  ;  xxi.  1,  5,  8  ;  1  Sam.  vii.  5  ff.  ;  x.  17  ff. 

2  Jud.  xviii.  31 ;  xxi.  19  ;  1  Sam.  i. -iv. 

3  Jud.  XX.  18,  23,  26  f. ;  xxi.  2,  4  ;  1  Sam.  x.  3.  *  1  Sam.  x.  5. 

^  1  Sam.  vii.  7,  9,  17  ;  ix.  12  f.  ;  x.  8 ;  xi.  14  f. ;  xvi.  4  f.  ;  comp. 
XV.  33.  6  1  Sam.  xiii.  9  f.  ;  xiv.  34  f. 

7  1  Sam.  XV.  21  ;  xx.  6,  28  f. ;  xxi.  1  ff.  ;  xxii.  9  ff.  ;  2  Sam.  v.  3 ; 
KV.  7  ff.  ;  xxi.  6,  9 ;  xxiv.  18,  25  ;  1  Kings  i.  9 ;  iii.  2  ff. 

8  Baudissin,  IL  pp.  232  ff.  ;  [Schultz,  L  pp.  206  f.]. 

«  1  Kings  XV.  14  ;  xxii.  44  ;  2  Kings  xii.  3  ;  xiv.  4  ;  xv.  4,  34  f. 
10  1  Kings  xviii.  30  ff.  "  1  Kings  xix.  10,  14. 

12  2  Kings  V.  17.  i^  isa.  xix.  18  ff.  ;  comp.  Zeph.  ii.  11. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  41 

places  of  worship  was  long  perfectly  lawful,  or,  as  we  now 
say,  orthodox,  since  the  most  faithful  kings  and  even 
the  prophets  gave  it  their  approval.  The  unfavorable 
criticism  on  this  subject  that  we  find  in  the  books  of 
Kings  and  Chronicles  should  not  lead  us  astray:  this  criti- 
cism is,  as  we  shall  see,  made  from  a  later  point  of  view. 
The  freedom  to  establish  places  of  worship  at  different 
points  at  the  same  time,  is  hallowed  even  by  the  oldest 
legislation,  for  in  it  Jehovah  is  made  to  say  that  wher- 
ever his  name  is  invoked,  altars  of  rough  stone  should 
be  reared  that  sacrifices  may  be  offered  to  him.^  The  at- 
tempt has  been  made  to  bring  this  ordinance  into  har- 
mony with  the  later  legislation,  which  requires  absolute 
centralization  of  worship,  by  maintaining  that,  in  the 
passage  quoted,  reference  is  made  to  the  various  places 
where  the  portable  sanctuary  and  its  altar,  of  which  this 
legislation  speaks,  may  from  time  to  time  be  established. 
But  this  altar  is  of  wood,  ornamented  with  brass ;  ^ 
while  our  passage  speaks  of  an  altar  of  stones  and  allows 
such  an  altar  to  be  reared  in  several  places  at  the  same 
time.  The  best  commentary  on  this  text  is  the  custom, 
that,  as  we  have  shown,  existed  in  Israel  until  toward 
the  Exile.  It  is  clearly  this  ancient  usage,  and  not  the 
centralization  of  worship,  first  required  by  Deuter- 
onomy, that  is  most  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of 
Mosaism.  The  primitive  liberty  respecting  places  of 
worship  was,  moreover,  very  natural  and  legitimate, 
since  it  corresponded  to  a  real  religious  need.  Ewald 
has  with  some  justice  connected  Ex.  xx.  24  f.,  which 
hallows  this   ancient  usage,  with   the   promise  of  the 

1  Ex.  XX.  24  f .  2  Ex.  xxvii.  1  f . ;  xxxviii.  30 ;  xxxix.  39, 


42  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

gospel :  "  Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  in  my  name, 
I  will  be  in  the  midst  of  them."  ^ 

The  absolute  centralization  of  worship  that  was  legally 
sanctioned  in  the  period  following,  nevertheless  has  its 
roots  in  the  earliest  history  of  Israel.  According  to 
document  A,  there  was,  even  in  the  desert,  a  central 
tabernacle.2  It  was  a  tent  that  sheltered  the  ark  of  the 
covenant,  whose  existence  since  this  date  is  proven  by 
the  same  document.^  In  the  days  of  the  judges  we 
find  the  ark  at  Bethel  and  Shiloh.^  In  serious  wars  the 
Israelites  carried  it  about  in  their  camp,  that  Jehovah, 
being  present  in  the  midst  of  the  army,  might  the  better 
lend  them  his  assistance.^  Wherever  the  ark  happened 
to  be,  sacrifices  might  be  offered  to  Jehovah.^  Before  it 
prayer  was  made  to  God.'^  When  David  wished  to 
establish  a  national  sanctuary  at  Jerusalem,  he  felt  the 
necessity  of  transjDorting  thither  the  sacred  ark,^  and 
the  temple  of  Solomon  itself  acquired  a  sacred  and 
national  character  only  through  its  presence.^  The 
above  discussion,  then,  shows  that  from  the  time  of 
Moses  the  ark  of  the  covenant  served  as  a  rallying  point 
for  all  Israel.  The  later  codes  were  able  to  find  support 
in  this  fact  for  presenting  the  centralization  of  worship 
as  Mosaic. 

1  Antiquities  of  Israel^  p.  121. 

2  Ex.  xxxiii.  7  ff.  ;  xxxiv.  34  f. ;  Num.  xii.  5,  10. 

3  Num.  x.  33-36;  xiv.  44  ;  Deut.  x.  8 ;  Josh.  iii.  f .  ;  vi.  ;  vii.  6. 

4  Jud.  XX.  26  f.  ;  1  Sam.  iii.  3 ;  iv.  3  f. 

s  1  Sam.  iv.  ;  xiv.  18 ;  2  Sam.  xi.  11  ;  Com.  xv.  24. 

6  1  Sam.  vi.  14  ff. ;  2  Sam.  vi.  13,  17  ;  1  Kings  viii.  6. 

7  Josh.  vii.  6  ff.  8  2  Sam.  vi. 
^  1  Kings  viii.  1  ff. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  43 

II.    The  Priesthood. 

The  same  freedom  that  originally  existed  with  refer- 
ence to  places  of  worship,  existed  also  with  reference 
to  the  priesthood.  Let  us  see  what  early  Hebrew  liter- 
ature teaches  us  on  this  point. 

According  to  document  A,  among  the  first  men  and 
in  the  days  of  the  patriarchs,  it  is  the  father  of  the 
family  who  exercises  the  functions  of  a  priest.  ^  Moses 
also  fulfils  these  functions. ^  In  offering  sacrifices,  at 
the  time  of  the  establishment  of  the  covenant  with 
Jehovah,  he  calls  to  his  assistance  young  men  chosen 
from  among  the  children  of  Israel,^  and  probably  from 
all  the  tribes.  This  freedom  of  usage  continued.  Gid- 
eon and  Manoah  offer  sacrifices  to  Jehovah,*  and  Saul 
does  likewise.^  When  David  has  the  sacred  ark  trans- 
ported to  Jerusalem,  he  wears  the  sacerdotal  costume, 
offers  sacrifices,  and  blesses  the  people.^  Solomon  also 
fulfils  sacerdotal  functions,^  likewise  the  prophet  Elijah.^ 
Jeroboam  and  Ahaz,  therefore,  in  assuming  them  in 
their  turn,^  do  nothing  unlawful  from  the  traditional 
point  of  view.  The  editor  of  the  books  of  Kings  finds 
fault  with  them  because  he  takes  the  later  standpoint 
of  the  legislation  of  Deuteronomy,  which,  as  we  shall 
see  farther  on,  condemns  any  but  a  Levitical  priesthood. 

1  Gen.  iv.  3  f.  ;  viii.  20  ;  xii.  7  f .  ;  xiii.  4,  18 ;  xv.  9  ;  xxii.  1  ff. ; 
xxvi.  25 ;  xxxv.  1  ff.  ;  xlvi.  1. 

2  Ex.  xxiv.  6-8  ;  comp.  xvii.  15.  ^  Ex.  xxiv.  4  f. 
4  Jud.  vi.  20  ff. ;  xiii.  16  ff. 

*  1  Sam.  xiii.  9  ff. ;  comp.  xiv.  34  f.  ^2  Sam.  vi. 

7  1  Kings  iii.  4 ;  viii.  14,  54  ff.,  62  ff.  ;  ix.  25 ;  x.  5. 

8  1  Kings  xviii.  22  ff.,  30  ff. 

9  1  Kings  xii.  32  -xiii.  1  ff.  ;  2  Kings  xvi.  12  f. 


44  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

The  universal  priesthood,  however,  is  not  merely  a 
matter  of  practice  at  the  beginning,  in  Israel.  In  a 
passage  from  document  A  it  is  represented  as  the  nor- 
mal institution.  In  fact,  we  read,  Ex.  xix.  6,  that 
when  he  established  his  covenant  with  the  children  of 
Israel,  Jehovah  caused  it  to  be  said  to  them :  "  Ye  shall 
be  unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation." 
All  Israelites,  therefore,  were  to  be  servants  conse- 
crated to  Jehovah,  having  free  access  to  his  presence.^ 
Nevertheless,  priests  early  make  their  appearance  in 
Israel  as  among  all  other  peoples  of  antiquity.  But 
originally  the  priesthood  does  not  form  a  separate  cast, 
is  not  the  prerogative  of  a  single  family.  Document  A 
speaks  of  Melchisedek,  a  priest  of  the  most-high  God, 
whose  authority  was  recognized  by  Abraham ;  ^  of  Jethro, 
the  priest  of  Midian,  whose  claim  to  the  office  is  allowed 
by  Aaron  and  the  elders  of  Israel ;  ^  and  of  Israelitish 
priests.*  Did  these  last  belong  to  the  tribe  of  Levi? 
There  is  no  indication  to  this  effect.  On  the  contrary, 
it  must  be  observed  that  the  Pentateuchal  documents 
which  speak  of  the  institution  of  the  Levitical  priest- 
hood place  this  ceremony  later.  In  the  book  of  Judges, 
an  Ephraimite  consecrates  his  son  to  be  priest  in  his 
own  private  sanctuary.^  He  afterwards,  when  the  occa- 
sion presents  itself,  replaces  him  by  a  Levite,  whom  he 
himself  also  consecrates  for  his  sacerdotal  functions ;  '^ 
but  this  Levite  does  not  belong  to  the  sacred  tribe;  he 
is  a  Levite  only  by  virtue  of  his  functions,  since  the 
statement  is  expressly  made  that  he  was  of  the  family 

1  See  Dilhnann,  i.l.  2  Gen.  xiv.  18-20. 

3  Ex.  ii.  16  ;  iii.  1  ;  xviii.  12.  *  Ex.  xix.  22,  24. 

5  xvii.  1-5.  €  ^^,  10,  12  f. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  45 

of  Judah.^  When  the  sacred  ark  is  brought  back  from 
the  country  of  the  Philistines  and  deposited  at  Kirjath- 
jearim,  in  the  house  of  Abinadab,  the-  people  of  the 
place  consecrate  the  son  of  this  latter  to  guard  it.^ 
Samuel  is  devoted  from  his  infancy  to  the  service  of  the 
sanctuary,^  and  he  later  fulfils  the  functions  of  a  priest/ 
although  he  belongs  neither  to  a  sacerdotal  family  nor 
to  the  tribe  of  Levi,^  as  was  finally  claimed  for  the  sake 
of  justifying  his  priestly  acts  from  the  later  standpoint.^ 
We  find  other  priests  who  are  not  Levites:  a  Jairite," 
a  son  of  Nathan  the  prophet,^  even  sons  of  David. ^ 
There  are,  it  is  true,  translators  who,  in  the  last  three 
cases,  change  the  priests  into  officers  or  ministers  of 
state,  but  this  is  an  error.  When,  therefore,  Jeroboam 
ordained  priests  who  were  not  Levites, ^"^  he  simply  fol- 
lowed ancient  custom,  sanctioned  by  the  most  faithful 
theocrats. 

Although,  at  first,  every  Israelite  might  become  a 
priest  of  Jehovah,  we  early  perceive  a  tendency  to  pre- 
fer as  priests  members  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Document 
A  itself  relates  that  the  sons  of  Levi  were  consecrated 
in  a  special  manner  to  the  service  of  Jehovah  by  the 
massacre  which,  at  Moses'  command,  they  wrought 
among  the  Israelites  who  had  worshipped  the  golden 
calf.^i  According  to  another  passage  of  the  same  docu- 
ment, which,  however,  is  evidently  borrowed  from  a 
different  source,  the  tribe  of  Levi  was  not  set  apart  for 

I  Jud.  xvii.  7.  2  1  Sam.  vii.  1.  ^1  Sam.  i.  ff. 
4  1  Sam.  vii.  9  f .  ;  ix.  12  f. ;  x.  8  ;  xvi.  5.  5  i  gam.  i.  1 ;  ii.  19. 
6  1  Chr.  vi.  28,  33. 

■^  2  Sam.  XX.  26  ;  comp.  Num.  xxxii.  41  ;  Deut.  iii.  14  ;  Jud.  x.  3  ff. 
^  1  Kings  iv.  5.  ^  2  Sam.  viii.  18. 

10  1  Kings  xii.  31  ;  xiii.  33  ;  comp.  2  Kings  xvii.  32. 

II  Ex.  xxsii.  26-29  j  comp.  Gen.  xxxiv.  25  f. 


46       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

the  service  of  Jehovah  until  after  the  death  of  Aaron.  ^ 
The  old  song,  Gen.  xlix.,  it  is  true,  does  not  speak 
very  favorably  of  Levi,^  probably  because  it  was  com- 
posed at  a  date  before  the  tribe  of  Levi  played  an  im- 
portant part;  but  another  song,  of  a  more  recent  date, 
though  relatively  ancient,  speaks  favorably  of  this 
tribe,  and  expressly  connects  it  with  the  priesthood, ^ 
as  does  also  1  Sam.  ii.  27  ff.  From  the  time  of  the 
judges  we  see  Levites,  but  more  particularly  descend- 
ants of  Moses  and  Aaron,  exercising  sacerdotal  func- 
tions at  certain  sanctuaries.*  It  appears  from  1  Sam. 
ii.  27  ff.  that  the  priest  Eli  belonged  to  the  tribe  of 
Levi.  We  see,  moreover,  that  the  priest  Ahijah,  who 
was  in  Saul's  train, ^  the  numerous  sacerdotal  family  of 
Nob,^  Abiathar  and  Zadok,  the  chief  priests  of  David, '^ 
were  descended  from  Eli  through  Ahitub,^  and  that, 
consequently,  they  were  all  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Since 
Solomon,  though  he  dismissed  Abiathar,^  retained  Zadok 
in  his  office,  ^^  and  the  descendants  of  this  latter  still 
held  the  priesthood  in  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the 
Exile,  it  may  be  admitted  that,  beginning  with  David, 
it  was  the  Levites  who  chiefly  occupied  the  priesthood 
at  .Jerusalem.  There  are,  however,  those  who  deny 
that  Zadok  was  a  descendant  of  Eli  and  therefore  of 
Aaron  and  Levi.^^ 

1  Deut.  X.  6-9.  2  Gen.  xlix.  5  ff.  ^  Deut.  xxxiii.  8-11. 

4  Jud.  xviii.  30  f.  ;  xx  26-28.  &  i  Sam.  xiv.  18. 

6  1  Sam.  xxi.  1  ff.  ;  xxii.  9  ff. 

7  2  Sam.  viii.   17  ;  xv.  24  ff.,  35  f. ;  xvii.  15 ;  xix.  11  ff. ;  xx.  25 ; 
1  Kings  i.  7  ff. 

8  1  Sam.  xiv.  3  ;  xxii.  20  ;  2  Sam.  viii.  17.  ^  1  Kings  ii.  26  f . 
10  1  Kings  ii.  35.                n  Vatke,  pp.  344  f. ;  Wellliausen,  pp.  125  f. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  47 

III.    Religious  Festivals, 

1.  The  Sabbath.  —  There  is  a  passage  in  document  A 
that  presupposes  the  existence  of  the  Sabbath  before  the 
promulgation  of  the  law.^  The  oldest  legislation  and 
even  the  decalogue  itself  enjoin  the  observance  of  it.^ 
The  Sabbath  is  perhaps  the  earliest  holiday  of  the  He- 
brews. At  any  rate  it  was  of  ancient  origin,  and  it 
always  remained  the  holiday  par  excellence.  Reuss  says 
on  this  subject:  "The  notion  of  the  week  with  its  holi- 
day doubtless  dates  from  the  remotest  antiquity.  We 
no  longer  hesitate  to  recognize  its  astronomic  origin, 
that  is,  to  connect  it  with  what  the  ancient  peoples 
called  the  seven  planets."  ^  Dillmann  expresses  himself 
to  the  same  purpose.  He  thinks,  however,  with  others, 
that  the  four  phases  of  the  moon  must  have  given  origin 
to  the  week;^  which  Reuss  finds  not  impossible,  but  im- 
probable, "  in  view  of  the  actual  duration  of  the  astro- 
nomic month,  which  is  twenty-nine  and  a  half  days." 

This  primitive  character  of  the  Sabbath,  however,  no 
longer  appears  in  Hebrew  literature.  According  to  the 
whole  Old  Testament  the  Sabbath  is  essentially  a  day 
of  rest.  This  is  clearly  expressed  in  the  various  codes 
of  the  Pentateuch,  including  the  oldest,^  and  it  harmo- 
nizes with  the  word  Sabbath^  which  means  rest.  Still 
the  Sabbath  cannot  have  received  this  significance  until 
the  Israelites  ceased  to  be  nomadic  shepherds,  to  become 

1  Ex.  xvi.  27-30.  2  Ex.  xx.  8  ff.  ;  xxiii.  12  ;  xxxiv.  21. 

3  Histoire  Sainte,  1.  p.  121  ;  comp.  Gesch.  §  71 ;  [Schrader,  Cunei- 
form Inscriptions  and  the  Old  Testament  (KAT)  on  Gen.  ii.  3. 

4  See  on  Ex.  xx.  8  ff. 

s  Ex.  XX.  10  ;  xxiii.  12  ;  xxxiv.  21  ;  xxi.  13  ff.  ;  Deut.  v.  14. 


48       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

an  agricultural  people.  For  "the  shepherd  knows  no 
Sabbath  in  this  sense,  although  it  was  doubtless  he  who 
first  observed  the  heavens  and  distinguished  the  fixed 
stars  from  the  planets.  His  flook  needs  care  and  food, 
and  must  be  led  to  water  one  day  as  well  as  another; 
his  kind  of  occupation  is  the  same  the  year  through. 
The  requirement  of  absolute  rest  does  not  date  from  the 
time  when  the  Israelites  were  nomads."^ 

What  the  ancient  documents  emphasize  most  is  the 
humanitarian  side  of  the  Sabbath.  Its  chief  end  is  to 
provide  rest  for  slaves  and  domestic  animals. ^  Even 
in  Deuteronomy  we  find  the  same  point  of  view.  The 
Sabbath  is  there  connected  with  the  memory  of  the  de- 
liverance from  slavery  in  Egypt ;  but  the  thought  of  the 
Deuteronomist  is  evidently  this:  Israel  should  remem- 
ber that  they  were  slaves  in  Egypt  and  that  Jehovah 
delivered  them,  that  they  may,  on  this  day,  give  rest 
to  their  slaves  as  Avell  as  themselves.^ 

2.  The  New  Moon.  —  The  first  of  the  [lunar]  month 
seems  to  have  been  a  holiday  in  Israel  from  remote  an- 
tiquity. We  see  that  every  new  moon  Saul  invited  his 
principal  servants  to  his  table.*  These  repasts  evidently 
had  a  religious  character,  since  Levitical  impurit}^  might 
exclude  one  from  them.^  We  see,  moreover,  that  even 
in  the  old  prophets,  and  always  afterward,  the  new 
moon  is  placed  upon  the  same  level  with  the  Sabbath 
and  other  festivals.^ 

1  Reuss,  Histoire  Sainte,  I.  p.  122  ;  [Schultz,  I.  p.  205]. 

2  Ex.  xxiii.  10  ;  xxxiv.  21  ;  comp.  xx.  10. 

3  Deut.  V.  14  f. ;  comp.  xv.  15.  4  i  gam.  xx.  5,  18,  24. 
6  1  Sam.  XX.  26. 

6  Amos  viii.  5 ;  Hos.  ii.  11  ;  Isa.  i.  13  f.  ;  Ezek.  xlv.  17  ;  xlvi.  1,  3  ;  Isa. 
Ixvi.  23 ;  2  Kings  iv.  23,  etc. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  49 

The  festival  of  the  new  moon  is  evidently  an  astro- 
nomic one.  The  Israelites  were  not  able  to  stamp  it 
with  a  theocratic  character,  as  they  did  the  other  festi- 
vals originally  borrowed  from  nature.  The  ancient 
codes  say  nothing  at  all  about  it.  As  this  festival, 
however,  existed  in  Israel  from  a  very  remote  date,  it 
is  probable  that  it,  like  other  religious  acts  and  institu- 
tions, rests  solely  on  the  usage  of  antiquity  in  general ; 
for  the  new  moon  was  celebrated  among  many  other 
peoples  by  a  great  festival.  ^ 

In  Israel  the  new  moons  were  days  of  rest, 2  when  the 
people  assembled  at  the  sanctuary, ^  and  when  they  pre- 
ferred to  go  to  consult  the  prophets. ^  This  explains 
why  the  discourses  of  the  prophets  were  sometimes 
inspired  and  delivered  on  these  days.^ 

3.  The  Three  Pilgrim  Feasts.  —  Document  A  enjoins 
the  celebration  of  three  annual  feasts,  the  feast  of  pass- 
over,  or  unleavened  bread,  that  of  weeks,  or  the  first- 
fruits  of  the  harvest,  and  that  of  the  vintage  at  the  end 
of  the  year;  they  are  also  called  pilgrim  feasts,  because, 
for  each  of  them,  every  male  Israelite  must  betake  him- 
self to  the  sanctuary  to  present  himself  before  Jehovah.^ 
It  was  on  the  occasion  of  these  solemnities  that  Solomon 
offered  sacrifices  three  times  a  year  to  God.^  It  was 
probably  also  one  of  these  feasts  to  which  the  father  of 
Samuel  went  up  to  Shiloh  every  year  to  worship  Jeho- 

1  Schenkel's  Bibel-Lexikon,  IV.  p.  322  ;  Riehm's  Handworterbuch , 
pp.  431,  1077  ;  [Ewald,  Antiquities,  pp.349  f.]. 

2  Amos  viii.  5.  3  Isa.  i.  13  f.;  Ezek.  xlvi.  1,  3  ;  Isa.  Ixvi.  23. 

4  2  Kings  iv.  23. 

5  Ezek.  xxvi.  1  ;  xxix.  17  ;  xxxi.  1  ;  xxxii.  1  ;  Hag.  i.  1. 
^  Ex.  xxiii.  14-17  ;  xxxiv.  18,  22-24. 

7  1  Kings  ix.  25  ;  comp.  2  Chron.  viii.  13. 


50       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

vah  and  offer  him  sacrifices,^  and  at  which  the  family  of 
David  sacrificed  in  Bethlehem. ^  It  appears  from  other 
passages  that,  from  remote  antiquity,  the  Israelites 
made  a  practice  of  celebrating  feasts  in  honor  of  Jeho- 
vah, which  seem  to  have  been  chiefly  days  of  popular 
rejoicing.^  Deuteronomy,  like  document  A,  mentions 
the  three  pilgrim  feasts  in  the  same  connection.* 

a.  The  Festival  of  Passover  and  Unleavened  Breads  in 
the  Old  Testament  represented  as  a  single  festival,  is 
certainly  a  union  of  two  distinct  feasts,  an  agricultural 
and  a  theocratic.  It  is  even  very  probable  that  originally 
this  feast  also  had  an  astronomical  significance,  that 
it  was  the  spring  festival  found  among  most  of  the 
peoples  of  antiquity.^  There  is  no  longer  any  trace 
of  this  last  feature  of  the  feast  of  passover  in  Hebrew 
literature,  but  its  agricultural  significance  appears  in 
some  passages,  especially  Lev.  xxiii.  9-14.  Here  the 
offering  of  the  first-fruits  of  the  harvest  is  combined 
with  the  passover,  and  this  offering  is  represented  as 
intimately  related  to  the  feast  to  be  celebrated  seven 
weeks  later,  at  the  end  of  the  harvest.  This  connection 
between  the  two  feasts  also  crops  out,  Deut.  xvi.  9, 
where  it  is  apparent  that  the  former  coincides  with  the 
time  when  the  sickle  is  put  into  the  harvest.  The  cus- 
tom of  eating  unleavened  bread  seven  days,  which  gave 

1  1  Sam.  i,  3,  7,  21.  2  1  Sam.  xx.  6,  29. 

3  Ex.  V.  1  ;  X.  9  ;  xxxii.  5  f.,  19  ;  Jud.  xxi.  19  ff.  ;  1  Kings  xii.  32  f. ; 
Amos  V.  21 ;  viii.  10  ;  Hos.  ii.  11  ;  ix.  5  ;  Isa.  i.  14  ;  xxix.  1 ;  xxx.  29  ; 
xxxiii.  20.  *  Chapter  xvi. 

5  Dillmann,  Bibel-Lexikon,  II.  p.  269  ;  also  Exodus  ?/.  Leviticus, 
p.  581  ;  Handiodrterbiich,  pp.  43.1  f.,  1139  f.  ;  Reuss,  Histoire  Sainte, 
I.  p.  164  ;  also  on  Ex.  xii.  2,  and  Gesch.,  §§  58,  289  ;  [Ewald,  Antiquities, 
pp.  358ff.]. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  51 

its  name  to  the  feast,  as  it  is  found  in  the  oldest  legal 
passages,  1  seems  also  to  have  sprung  from  the  connec- 
tion of  this  feast  with  the  commencement  of  the  harvest. ^ 
The  feast  of  unleavened  bread  is  combined  with 
the  feast  of  passover;  but,  in  all  our  documents,  the 
agricultural  character  of  the  former  is  almost  entirely 
eclipsed  by  the  theocratic  character  of  the  latter.  The 
term  pesach^  which  we  render  passover,  means  passage. 
Even  document  A  is  acquainted  with  it.^  It  declares 
that  the  passover  is  celebrated  in  honor  of  Jehovah,  who 
passed  over  the  dwellings  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and 
spared  them  when  he  smote  Egypt.^  This  explanation 
is  reproduced  in  document  C.^  Document  A  itself 
unites  the  feast  of  passover  with  the  feast  of  unleavened 
bread,  saying  that  the  Israelites  had  to  leave  Egypt  in 
so  hurried  a  manner  that  they  were  obliged  to  take  their 
dough  before  it  w^as  leavened  and  make  cakes  of  it  at 
the  first  stopping-place.^  This  explanation  is  not  natu- 
ral. We  learn,  moreover,  from  Ex.  xii.  8  (document 
C),  that  Moses  gave  orders  beforehand  to  eat  the  pass- 
over  with  unleavened  bread.  We  must,  therefore,  seek 
the  reason  for  this  custom  in  the  agricultural  character 
of  the  feast,  or  admit  that  fermentation  was  regarded 
by  the  Israelites  as  something  impure."  In  the  latter 
case,  the  urgent  injunction  not  to  use  leaven  during  the 
continuance  of  the  feast  would  be  perfectly  explained,^ 

1  Ex.  xxiii.  15  ;  xxxiv.  18. 

2  Dillmann  on  Ex.  xii.  20  ;   also   Bihel-LexiTcon,  IV.  p.  387  ff.  ; 
[Wellhausen,  pp.  89  f.]. 

3  Ex.  xxxiv.  25.  *  Ex.  xii.  27.  ^  Ex.  xii.  11-18. 
6  Ex.  xii.  34,  39  ;  comp.  Deut.  xvi.  3. 

"<  Lev.  ii.  4  f.,  11  f. ;  comp.  Oehler,  §  124. 
8  Ex.  xii.  15,  19 ;  xiii.  7  ;  Deut.  xvi.  4. 


52  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

as  well  as  the  strict  prohibition  against  offering  the 
blood  of  the  sacrifice  with  fermented  bread. ^  It  doubt- 
less contributed  to  the  identification  of  the  two  feasts 
that  all  the  documents  of  the  Pentateuch  place  the 
exodus  from  Egypt  in  the  first  month  of  the  year,  the 
month  of  ears,^  in  which  occurred  the  feast  of  the  com- 
mencement of  the  harvest  and  the  feast  of  the  spring- 
time.^ 

Document  A  commands  the  celebration  of  this  double 
feast  every  year,  for  the  purpose  of  perpetuating  the 
memory  of  the  exodus  from  Egypt,  by  eating  unleav- 
ened bread  seven  days,  and,  on  the  seventh  day,  observ- 
ing a  special  festival  in  honor  of  Jehovah.^  It  also 
enjoins  that  every  male  Israelite  present  himself  before 
God  with  sacrifices,  among  which  that  of  the  passover 
occupies  the  first  rank.^  If  Ex.  xxiii.  19  and  xxxiv.  26 
are  to  be  closely  connected  with  the  verses  preceding, 
if  these  passages  mean  that  at  the  feast  of  the  passover 
the  first-fruits  of  the  land  must  be  brought  to  the  sanc- 
tuary, as  appears  from  Lev.  xxiii.  9  ff.,  this  is  a  new 
proof  of  the  agricultural  character  of  this  feast. 

Deuteronom}'  agrees  with  these  injunctions  in  their 
essential  features ;  but  it  gives  them  greater  precision, 
ordaining  that  large  and  small  cattle  be  offered  in  the 
evening,  from  the  beginning  of  the  feast,  in  sacrifice 
to  Jehovah,  and  that  the  flesh  be  cooked  and  eaten;  it 
insists,  and  this  is  peculiar  to  it,  that  the  sacrifice  of  the 
passover  can  be  offered  and  eaten  only  at  the  place  where 

^  Ex.  xxiii.  18  ;  xxxiv.  25. 

2  Ex.  xii.  1  ;  xiii.  4  ;  xxiii.  15  ;  xxxiv.  18  ;  Deut.  xvi.  1. 

3  Dillmann,  i.l.  4  Ex.  xiii.  3-10, 
5  Ex.  xii.  27  ;  xxxiv.  33-25  ;  xxiii.  15,  17  f . 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  53 

the  lawful  sanctuary  is  located.  ^  This  code  must  have 
introduced  certain  innovations.  Under  its  influence, 
in  fact,  King  Josiah  caused  the  passover  to  be  kept 
as  it  had  never  before  been  celebrated. ^  According  to 
Professor  Reuss  the  passover  had  hitherto  been  the 
spring  festival  and  then  only  took  a  theocratic  charac- 
ter.2  But  since  even  document  A  gives  the  feast  this 
character  in  a  number  of  passages,  we  cannot  admit 
such  a  view.  It  must,  moreover,  be  observed  that  the 
deliverance  from  slavery  in  Egypt,  even  in  old  docu- 
ments, such  as  the  song  of  deliverance,  Ex.  xv.,  and  the 
decalogue,  appears  as  the  chief  of  the  benefits  bestowed 
by  Jehovah  upon  Israel.  It  is,  therefore,  inadmissible 
to  suppose  that  they  waited  until  the  time  of  Josiah  to 
celebrate  this  blessing;  it  must  have  been  celebrated 
from  early  times,  and  that  in  the  spring,  in  the  month 
of  ears,  together  with  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread,  as 
document  A  says  in  several  places.  The  important 
modifications  that  the  strict  centralization  of  worship 
necessarily  occasioned  in  the  celebration  of  the  passover 
under  Josiah  sufficiently  explain  the  statement  of  the 
second  book  of  Kings,  to  which  reference  has  just  been 
made,  and  on  which  Professor  Reuss  bases  his  view. 

Inquiring  now  into  the  real  significance  of  this  feast, 
we  must  take  account  of  its  twofold  character.  The 
feast  of  unleavened  bread,  considered  as  a  feast  in- 
augurating the  harvest,  in  which  the  first-fruits  of  the 
land  are  offered  to  God,  has  the  same  significance  as 
analogous  festivals  among  the  other  peoples.     Offerings 

1  Deut.  xvi.  1-8.  2  2  Kings  xxiii.  21-23. 

2  See  Reuss  on  this  passage  ;  Histoire  Sainte,  I.  pp.  164  1,  and 
fleschichte,  §  289  ;  [Wellhausen,  p.  93]. 


54  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

were  presented  to  the  divinity  at  the  beginning  of  the 
harvest,  to  express  this  thought,  that  the  first-fruits  of 
the  year  should  be  consecrated  to  the  giver  of  all  things, 
and  that  man  can  properly  enjoy  his  blessings  only 
when  this  has  been  done.^ 

As  for  the  feast  of  passover,  it  is  a  commemoration 
of  the  deliverance  from  slavery  in  Egypt  and  the  foun- 
dation of  the  Israelitish  nation,  as  well  as  of  their  cov- 
enant with  Jehovah;  for,  according  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, Israel  forms  a  nation  and  becomes  the  people  of 
Jehovah  first  from  this  moment.  In  order  to  awaken 
and  maintain  the  feeling  of  gratitude  toAvard  God, 
fathers  must  at  each  feast  remind  their  sons  of  this 
great  and  memorable  token  of  Jehovah's  goodness. ^ 

h.  The  Feast  of  the  Harvest  is  also  called  the  feast  of 
weeks,  because  just  seven  weeks  are  to  be  counted  after 
the  feast  of  the  passover  in  fixing  its  date.^  According 
to  Lev.  xxiii.  10,  the  first-fruits  of  the  harvest  to  be 
offered  at  the  passover  can  only  be  the  first-fruits  of  the 
barley  harvest.*  It  is  the  first-fruits  of  the  wheat  har- 
vest,^ which  comes  later,  that  belong  to  the  feast  of 
weeks.  For  this  harvest,  therefore,  the  feast  of  weeks 
is  the  feast  of  first-fruits.^ 

This  feast  is  reckoned  among  the  pilgrim  feasts  at 
which  every  male  Israelite  must  present  himself  before 
Jehovah.'''  It  is  closely  related  to  the  agricultural  feast 
of  unleavened  bread,  as  clearly  appears  from  Lev.  xxiii. 
It  is  the  feast  of  the  close  of  the  harvest,  as  the  feast  of 

1  Dillmann  on  Lev.  xxiii.  10  and  14. 

2  Ex.  xii.  26  f.  ;  xiii.  8  f. 

3  Ex.  xxiii.  16  ;  xxxiv.  22  ;  Deut.  xvi.  9  f. ;  Lev.  xxiii.  15  f. 

4  Dillmann  on  Lev.  xxiii.  10.  ^  Ex.  xxxiv.  22. 

6  Ex.  xxiii.  16.  '  Ex.  xxiii.  17  ;  xxxiv.  23  ;  Deut.  xvi.  16. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  55 

unleavened  bread  is  the  feast  of  the  commencement.^ 
It  lasts  only  one  day.^ 

Touching  this  feast,  Deuteronomy  is  content  with 
saying  that  the  offerings  must  be  voluntary  and  propor- 
tionate to  the  blessings  that  each  has  received  from 
God ;  ^  that  it  must  be  a  joyful  feast,  celebrated  at  the 
sanctuary  by  the  whole  family,  including  the  servants, 
to  whom  must  be  added  the  Levites,  the  strangers,  the 
orphans,  and  the  widows  who  are  in  Israel ;  *  that  such 
kindness  must  be  displayed  because  Israel  were  slaves 
in  Egypt,  and  Jehovah  delivered  them.^ 

This  feast,  like  that  of  unleavened  bread,  is  evi- 
dently a  feast  of  thanksgiving;  it  is  intended  to  ex- 
press gratitude  toward  God  for  the  harvest.  Among  the 
early  Israelites  it  always  had  a  purely  agricultural  char- 
acter. It  was  not  until  a  later  date  that  the  Jews, 
wishing  to  give  it  a  theocratic  character,  made  it  com- 
memorative of  the  promulgation  of  the  law. 

c.  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  is  the  third  pilgrim  feast. 
Document  A,  however,  does  not  give  it  the  name  feast 
of  tabernacles,  as  does  Deuteronomy.^  It  speaks  simply 
of  the  feast  of  the  harvest,  which  is  to  be  celebrated  at 
the  end  of  the  year,  when  the  Israelites  gather  from  the 
fields  the  fruits  of  their  labor. ^  To  this  feast,  as  a 
feast  of  tabernacles,  allusion  is  evidently  made,  Hos. 
xii.  9,  where  feast-days  are  mentioned  on  which  it  is 
customary  to  live  in  tents.  The  feast  of  Jehovah,  spoken 
of,  Jud.  xxi.  19  ff.,  which  was  celebrated  every  year  at 

1  Bihel-Lexikon,  II.  p.  269 ;  IV.  p.  512  ;  Handworterbuch,  p.  433 ; 

[ Wellhausen,  pp.  85  f.] .  2  Lev.  xxiii.  21 ;  Num.  xxviii.  26. 

3  xvi.  10.                    ^  xvi.  11.  °  xvi.  12  ;  comp.  v.  15  ;  xv.  15. 

6  Deut.  xvi.  13  ff.  '^  Ex.  xxiii.  16  ;  xxxiv.  22. 


56  THEOLOGY   OF   THE  OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Shiloh,  and  at  which  the  young  girls  engaged  in  danc- 
ing, is  also  probably  the  feast  of  tabernacles. 

Even  in  early  times  this  feast  was  celebrated  seven 
days  in  the  seventh  month,  and  it  was  called  simply  the 
feast  because  it  was  the  feast  par  excellence.^  Thus  it 
appears,  also,  Zech.  xiv.  16-19,  and  Ezek.  xlv.  25.  Jero- 
boam transferred  it  to  the  following  month  for  the  king- 
dom of  the  ten  tribes, ^  probably  because,  in  the  north  of 
Palestine,  the  vintage  and  the  harvest  of  the  autumnal 
fruits  occurred  later  than  in  the  South. 

According  to  Deuteronomy  this  feast  must  be  cele- 
brated in  honor  of  Jehovah,  at  his  sanctuary,  at  the  time 
when  the  products  of  the  threshing-floor  and  the  wine- 
press are  gathered ;  it  must  be  a  joyful  festival,  in  which 
everybody,  including  the  Levites  and  the  poor,  are  to 
take  part ;  the  offerings  to  Jehovah  are  to  be  proportion- 
ate to  the  blessings  that  each  has  received. ^  The  sig- 
nificance of  this  feast  is  very  clear.  Celebrated  at  the 
beginning  of  autumn,  when  the  vintage  occurred,  and 
the  latest  products  of  the  soil  and  the  latest  fruits  of 
the  trees  were  gathered,  it  was  the  general  and  prin- 
cipal feast  of  the  harvests  of  the  entire  year,  a  feast 
essentially  agricultural,  a  feast  of  joy  and  gratitude 
toward  God,  the  author  of  nature  and  the  dispenser  of 
temporal  blessings.  The  custom  of  celebrating  this 
feast  under  booths  of  leafy  branches  was  certainly,  in 
the  beginning,  intimately  related  to  its  rural  character. 

1  1  Kings  viii.  2,  65.  2  1  Kings  xii.  32  f.  ^  pgut.  xvi.  13-17. 


FIRST  PERIOD. — §6.    WORSHIP.  67 

IV.    Religious  Rites. 

1.  Circumcision,  —  Circumcision,  the  initial  rite  of 
the  old  covenant,  1  is  not  an  exclusively  Israelitish 
custom ;  it  is  found  among  many  peoples,  ancient  and 
modern. 2  According  to  document  A  this  sacred  cus- 
tom existed  in  the  family  of  Israel  from  remote  antiquity. 
In  the  days  of  Moses  and  Joshua  a  stone  knife  was  used 
for  the  purpose,^  which  seems  to  indicate  that  it  origi- 
nated as  early  as  the  stone  age.*  The  oldest  historical 
books  teach  us  that  the  Israelites,  when  they  wished 
to  cast  upon  their  enemies,  and  particularly  the  Philis- 
tines, a  stinging  reproach,  called  them  the  uncircum- 
cised.^  Document  C,  which  is  generally  very  theoreti- 
cal, manifests  the  same  tendency  with  reference  to 
circumcision.  Not  content  with  representing  this  as 
an  old  and  sacred  custom,  it  makes  it  a  divine  ordi- 
nance, dating  from  Abraham;  it  represents  it  as  the 
perpetual  sign  of  the  covenant  with  God;  it  says  that 
every  one  who  is  uncircumcised  must  be  exterminated 
from  the  midst  of  the  Hebrews,  that  even  slaves  must 
be  circumcised,  and  that  all  male  children  are  to  be  on 
the  eighth  day  after  their  birth. ^  It  teaches  also  that 
in  exceptional  cases  circumcision  might  be  performed 
at  any  age,'''  and  that  a  stranger  could  not  partake  of 
the  passover  without  being  circumcised.^ 

1  Lev.  xii.  3  ;  Gen.  xvii.  10  ff.,  23  ff. ;  xxi.  4. 

2  Bibel-Lexikon,  I.  pp.  405  f.  ;  [Smith,  Dictionary^  art.   Circum- 
cision]. 3  Gen.  xxxiv.  14  ff.  ;  Ex.  iv.  24-26  ;  Josh.  v.  2-8. 

4  Dillmann  on  Ex.  iv.  25. 

5  Jud.  xiv.  3  ;  xv.  18  ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  6  ;  xvii.  26,  36  ;  xxxi.  4  ;  2  Sam. 
i.  20.  6  Gen.  xvii.  10-14  ;  xxi.  4 ;  Lev.  xii.  3. 

'  Gen.  xvii.  23-27  ;  comp.  xxxiv.  24.  ^  Ex.  xii.  44,  48. 


58  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

What  is  the  real  significance  of  this  sacrament? 
There  are  various  opinions  on  the  subject.  It  is  certain 
that  circumcision  is  an  act  of  consecration  to  Jehovah.  ^ 
Thereby  every  male  Israelite  is  incorporated  with  the 
chosen  people  and  obtains  the  privileges  that  are  con- 
nected with  the  covenant  with  Jehovah.  Some  modern 
theologians,  starting  from  Ex.  iv.  24-26,  profess  to  see 
in  it,  above  all,  a  bloody  sacrifice,  performed  at  the  very 
source  of  life,  by  which  the  life  of  every  Israelite  is, 
from  his  youth,  consecrated  to  God ;  and  they  maintain 
that  circumcision  is  only  secondarily  and  as  a  conse- 
quence of  this  significance,  the  sign  of  the  covenant 
with  Jehovah. 2  Others  combat  the  idea  that  circum- 
cision is  a  sacrifice ;  they  see  in  it  an  act  of  purification 
and  therefore  of  consecration  to  God.^  Steiner  adopts 
a  combination  of  both  views,*  which  are  really  mutually 
exclusive. 

It  is  certain  that,  according  to  the  old  passage  Ex. 
iv.  24-26,  "  circumcision  is  a  sacramental  act,  in  which 
the  blood  of  the  child  redeems  the  life  of  the  father,  a 
symbolic  sort  of  sacrifice  which  insures  divine  favor,  "^ 
and  that,  by  this  act,  the  circumcised  child  is  at  the 
same  time  consecrated  to  God.^  But  in  a  number  of 
other  passages  —  of  a  later  date,  it  is  true  —  circumcision 
is  also  the  symbol  of  purity  or  purification.  There  are 
references  to  circumcised  hearts,  i.e.  regenerate,  pure, 
obedient  hearts ;  and  to  uncircumcised  hearts,  i.e.  hearts 
that  are  impure  and  rebellious  toward  God.'^     An  inat- 

1  Keuss,  Gesch.,  §  71  ;  [Ewald,  Antiquities,  pp.  92  f.]. 

2  Dillmann  on  Ex.  iv.  26  and  Lev.  xii.  3. 

3  Handworterbuch,  p.  170  ;  Oeliler,  §  88. 

*  Bibel-Lexikon,  I.  pp.  408  f.  ^  Reuss,  i.l.  ^  Dillmann,  i.l. 

'  Lev.  xxvi.  41 ;  Deut.  x.  16  ;  xxx.  6  ;  Jer.  iv.  4  ;  ix.  26  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  7. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  59 

tentive  ear,  one  that  will  not  hear  the  word  of  Jehovah, 
is  an  uncircumcised  ear.^  The  first-fruits  of  trees  are 
considered  uncircumcised,  i.e.  as  impure,  and  not  to  be 
eaten.  2 

Inasmuch  as  circumcision  was  an  act  of  consecra- 
tion to  Jehovah,  it  was  necessarily  an  act  of  purification 
and  sanctification,  since  nothing  could  be  consecrated 
without  being  purified  and  sanctified.  Israel  must  be 
a  holy  people,  and  one  could  become  part  of  this  people 
only  by  circumcision:  the  idea  of  sanctification  was 
therefore  inseparable  from  this  ceremony.  Dillmann 
maintains  that  if  circumcision  had  been  an  act  of  purifi- 
cation, there  must  have  been  an  analogous  purification 
for  the  female  child. ^  But  this  argument  is  weak. 
The  Israelitish  woman  played  a  very  subordinate  part 
even  in  matters  of  religion.  She  belonged  to  the  peo- 
ple of  God,  by  virtue  of  being  the  daughter,  the  wife, 
or  the  slave  of  the  head  of  a  family ;  she  had  no  need 
of  being  otherwise  incorporated  with  it.^ 

2.  Sacynfices.  —  The  most  important  religious  act, 
the  essential  part  of  worship  among  almost  all  the  peo- 
ples of  antiquity,  and  not  less  so  among  the  Israelites, 
is  sacrifice.  The  custom  of  offering  sacrifices  seems  to 
be  of  as  ancient  a  date  as  religion  itself.  It  suggested 
itself  very  naturally  to  the  primitive  man,  with  his 
exceedingly  infantile  notions  respecting  the  Deity.  At 
first  the  gods  were  supposed  to  have  all  the  needs  and 
desires  of  men.  To  secure  their  favor,  to  appease 
their  wrath,  or  to  manifest  gratitude  to  them,  presents 
were   brought   and   sacrifices    offered   to   them.      This 

1  Jer.  vi.  10.  2  ^ev.  xix.  23.  ^  See  on  Lev.  xii.  3. 

*  Handworterbuch,  p.  168  ;  Oehler,  §  88. 


60       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

means  was  considered  more  efficacious  than  simple 
prayer. 

The  practice  of  offering  sacrifices  certainly  existed 
among  the  Hebrews  from  times  the  most  remote.  Doc- 
ument A  represents  it  as  dating  from  the  first  man.^ 
The  same  authority  testifies  to  its  existence  in  the  days 
of  the  patriarchs,^  as  well  as  in  those  of  Moses  and 
Joshua.^  The  oldest  of  the  other  historical  books  give 
evidence  of  its  continued  existence.*  But  it  must  be 
observed  that  the  legal  portion  of  document  A  knows 
nothing  of  either  an  institution  or  a  regulation  of  sac- 
rifices. Traditional  usage  seems  originally  to  have 
sufficed  on  this  as  on  so  many  other  points. 

It  clearl}^  follows  from  the  passages  cited,  and  many 
others,  that,  in  ancient  times,  the  rite  did  not  play  the 
part  that  it  did  afterwards;  for  it  is  nowhere  dwelt 
upon.  The  important  thing  was  not  the  rite,  Avhich,  in 
an  age  when  primitive  simplicity  and  freedom  reigned, 
was  probably  not  strictly  uniform.^  The  important 
thing"  was  that  the  sacrifices  be  offered  to  Jehovah  and 
not  to  other  gods.^ 

Among  all  peoples  sacrifices  are  essentially  offerings, 
gifts  made  to  the  divinity  by  his  worshippers.  It  was 
the  same   in  Israel.     This  is   expressed   by  the  term 

1  Gen.  iv.  3  f.  ;  viii.  20. 

2  Gen.  XV.  9  ff. ;  xxii.  2  ff.,  13  ;  xxxi.  54  ;  xlvi.  1. 

3  Ex.  V.  3  ;  X.  25  f .  ;  xviii.  12  ;  xx.  24  ;  xxii.  20  ;  xxiv.  5  ;  xxxii.  6  ; 
xxxiv.  25  ;  Num.  xxv.  2  ;  Josh.  xxii.  23,  26-29. 

*  Jud.  ii.  5  ;  vi.  19-21,  25-28  ;  xi.  31  ;  xiii.  16,  19 ;  xx.  26 ;  xxi.  4  ; 
1  Sam.  i.  3,  21,  24  f. ;  ii.  13  ff.,  28  f. ;  iii.  14  ;  vii.  9  f. ;  ix.  13 ;  x.  8 ; 
xi.  15  ;  xiii.  9  f.  ;  xv.  15,  22;  xvi.  2  ff.  ;  xx.  6,  29 ;  xxvi.  19  ;  etc. 

5  Jud.  vi.  19  f.  ;  xi.  30  f .  ;  xiii.  15, 19  ;  1  Sam.  vi.  14  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  13  ; 
1  Kings  viii.  30  ff.  ;  xix.  19-21.  6  Ex.  xxii.  20. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  61 

minchah^  offering,  which  was  originally  applied  to  sacri- 
fices in  general,  1  and  not  to  bloodless  sacrifices  alone,  as 
the  later  legislation  would  lead  one  to  suppose. ^  Since 
in  document  A  it  denotes  especially  bloodless  sacrifices, 
we  find  there  and  in  Ezekiel  another  term  for  sacrifices 
in  general,  viz.  qorhan^  which  also  means  offering, 
present.^ 

Sacrifices  have  the  same  object  as  any  other  offering 
made  to  Jehovah,  —  to  obtain  or  retain  his  favors,  or  to 
render  thanks  for  favors  obtained.  But  what  distin- 
guishes the  sacrifice  from  other  offerings  is  that  it  is 
offered  and  partly  or  wholly  burned  on  the  altar,  the 
table  of  Jehovah,  and  that  it  is  thought  to  serve  as 
food  for  God.  In  fact,  only  things  that  are  edible  are 
offered  to  him,  — and  those  the  best  both  of  fruits  of 
the  earth  and  domestic,  or,  in  biblical  phraseology, 
clean,  animals.*  Sacrifices  are  actually  called  the  food 
of  God,^  and  said  to  have  an  odor  pleasant  to  him.^ 
Libations  of  wine  were  added  ^  because  man  does  not 
usually  eat  without  drinking.  Since,  also,  perfumes 
were  esteemed  and  freely  used  on  grand  occasions, 
they  were  burned  on  the  altars  of  Jehovah,^  after  the 
fashion  followed  elsewhere.^ 

1  Gen.  iv.  3-5 ;  Num.  xvi.  15  ;  Jud.  vi.  18  f.  ;  1  Sam.  ii.  17  ;  xxvi. 
19  ;  Isa.  i.  13  ;  Mai.  i.  10-13  ;  ii.  12  f. ;  iii.  3  f.  2  Lev.  ii. 

3  Lev.  i.  2  ff.  ;  ii.  1  ff. ;  iii.  i  ff. ;  iv.  23,  28,  32 ;  v.  11,  etc. ;  Ezek. 
XX.  28  ;  xl.  ;  xl.  43. 

4  Gen.  iv.  3  f . ;  viii.  20 ;  1  Sam.  xv.  15  ;  Lev.  xxii.  20  ff.  ;  Mai.  i.  8, 14. 
s  Lev.  iii.  11,  16  ;  xxi.  6,  8,  17,  21  f. ;  etc. 

6  Gen.  viii.  21 ;  Ex.  xxix.  18,  25,  41 ;  Lev.  i.  9,  13,  17  ;  ii.  2,  9, 
12  ;  etc.  "^  Hos.  ix.  4  ;  Num.  xv.  5  ff .  ;  xxviii.  7  ff. 

8  Isa.  i.  13  ;  Jer.  xxxiii.  18 ;  xli.  5 ;  1  Kings  iii.  3  ;  ix.  25  ;  xiii.  1 ; 
Ex.  XXX.  7  f.,  34-38 ;  Lev.  ii.  1,  15 ;  xvi.  12  f. 

9  Dillmann  on  Ex.  xxx.  34-38. 


62       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

The  original  ground  for  sacrifices,  then,  is  the  thought 
that  the  Deity  takes  nourishment;  in  fine,  has  human 
needs.  But  with  the  progress  of  religious  ideas  in 
Israel  this  custom  took  on  a  more  enlightened  charac- 
ter; so  that  it  could  be  preserved  even  when  a  purer 
conception  of  the  Deity  became  prevalent.  He  who 
presented  an  offering  to  Jehovah  made  a  sacrifice,  re- 
nounced some  good  in  favor  of  God ;  but  he  connected 
with  this  act  a  religious  thought,  a  feeling,  a  desire, 
a  vow:  the  offering  was,  so  to  speak,  the  vehicle  for 
them,  the  means  of  presenting  them  to  God.  It  was  a 
thought,  a  feeling  of  adoration  or  thankfulness  for  bless- 
ings received,  or  perhaps  a  prayer,  a  vow,  that  new 
benefits  might  be  obtained.  Sacrifices  thus  also  denoted 
the  covenant  relations  that  Israel  enjoyed  with  Jeho- 
vah; were  the  means  of  maintaining  this  covenant,  or 
restoring  it  when  it  had  been  violated  by  any  infidelity. ^ 

The  Israelites,  in  imitation  of  the  idolatrous  peoples 
about  them,  sometimes  sacrificed  their  children  to  Baal 
and  Moloch. 2  In  early  times  such  sacrifices  might  also 
be  made  to  Jehovah,  as  is  proven  by  the  case  of  Jeph- 
thah's  daughter,  offered  as  a  burnt  sacrifice  by  her 
father.^  It  was  Jehovah  before  whom  King  Agag  was 
slain  by  Samuel,*  and  seven  sons  of  Saul,  devoted  to 
this  purpose  by  David,  were  hanged.^  The  story  in 
Genesis,  representing  God  as  interfering  to  prevent 
Abraham  from  offering  his  son  Isaac  as  a  burnt  sacri- 
fice, was  certainly  intended  to  show  that  Jehovah  does 

1  De  Wette,  Archeologie,  §  200 ;  Dillmann,  Exodus  u.  Leviticus, 
pp.  376  f.  ;  [Ewald,  Antiquities,  pp.  23  ff.J. 

2  Jer.  vii.  31 ;  xix.  5  ;  xxxii.  35  ;  Ezek,  xvi.  20  f.  ;  2  Kings  xvi.  3  ; 
xvii.  17  ;  xxiii.  10 ;  comp.  Lev.  xviii.  21  ;  xx.  2  ff. 

3  Jud.  xi.  30  f.,  34-39.  ^  1  Sam.  xv.  33.  &  2  Sam.  xxi.  6. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  6.   WORSHIP.  63 

not  accept  sacrifices  of  this  sort.  Such  a  lesson  could 
only  be  necessary  if  the  early  Hebrews  sacrificed  their 
children  to  God,  as  was  the  practice  among  other 
Semitic  peoples. 

It  was  first-born  sons  who  were  the  favorite  offerings,^ 
because  they,  like  the  first-born  of  the  flocks  and  herds, 
were  believed  to  belong  more  especially  to  the  Deity.  ^ 

3.  The  Offering  of  the  First-horn^  First-fruits^  a^id 
Tithes.  —  As  distinct  and  regular  offerings  the  Israelites 
had  to  give  to  Jehovah  the  first-born,  the  first-fruits  of 
the  land,  and  tithes,  as  appears  even  from  document 
A. 3  From  the  time  when  human  sacrifices  were  forbid- 
den in  Israel  the  first-born  of  men  had  to  be  redeemed.* 

Offerings  of  the  same  kind  were  made  among  other 
peoples.  The  reason  is  easily  comprehended.'  There 
was  a  strong  conviction  that  all  blessings  come  from  the 
Deity,  and  that  they  could  not  lawfully  be  enjoyed  until 
after  a  part  had  been  rendered  to  him  as  a  token  of  grati- 
tude. First-fruits  were  offered,  because  the  claims  of 
the  Deity  take  priority  over  those  of  men,  because  first- 
fruits  are  generally  the  best  that  one  has,  and  because, 
as  the  earliest  products,  they  represent  all  that  follow. 
Tithes  were  offered,  because,  according  to  a  very  widely 
recognized  symbolism,  the  number  ten  was  regarded  as 
a  perfect  number,  representing  totality.  In  Israel, 
moreover,  Jehovah  was  considered  the  proprietor  of  the 
soil  and  the  king  of  the  country,  so  that  these  offerings 

1  Mic.  vi.  7  ;  Ezek.  xx.  26. 

2  Ex.  xxii.  29  f.  ;  xxxiv.  19  f. ;  Num.  xviii.  15. 

3  Gen.  xiv.  20  ;  xxviii.  22  ;  Ex.  xiii.  11-16  ;  xxii.  29  f. ;  xxiii.  19  ; 
xxxiv.  19  f.,  26. 

*  Ex.  xiii.  13,  15  ;  xxxiv.  20 ;  Num.  xviii.  15  f. 


64  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

were  only  a  just  tribute.^  Deuteronomy,  especially  in 
the  case  of  first-fruits,  gives  as  a  reason  for  offering 
them,  that  Jehovah  brought  Israel  forth  from  Egypt  to 
give  them  the  good  land  of  Canaan,  flowing  with  milk 
and  honey.  "^  The  reason  for  offering  the  first-born,  as 
given  in  several  passages,  is  the  fact  that  Jehovah 
spared  the  first-born  of  the  Hebrews  when  he  slew  those 
of  the  Egyptians ;  it  was  to  perpetuate  the  memory  of 
the  deliverance  from  Egypt. ^ 

The  earl}^  documents  say  nothing  about  the  way  in 
which  these  offerings  are  to  be  consecrated  to  Jehovah. 
It  was  doubtless  done  in  the  form  of  sacrifice,  as  is 
indicated  by  Dent.  xv.  21.  According  to  this  same 
document  the  victims  sacrificed  furnished  a  joyful  fam- 
ily meal,  eaten  before  Jehovah,  i.e.  at  the  sanctuary, 
and  shared  by  the  Levites  and  the  poor.^  We  have 
here  the  description  of  a  traditional  custom,  wdiich  Deu- 
teronomy presupposes,  rather  than  inaugurates;  the 
only  new  provision  is  that  these  religious  feasts  must  be 
celebrated  exclusively  at  the  lawful  sanctuary.^  Touch- 
ing tithes,  it  commands  that  every  three  years  they  be 
given  up  to  the  Levites  and  the  poor.^  Document  C, 
on  the  other  hand,  claims  that  these  and  many  other 
offerings  fall  to  the  priests  alone."  This  is,  moreover, 
the  general  tendency  of  this  document:  it  seeks  to  in- 

1  Hnndicdrterbuch,  pp.  396.  398  ;  Dillmann  on  Lev.  xxvii.  30-33 ; 
[Schultz,  II.  pp.  10  f.]. 

2  Deut.  xxvi.  2-10,  15.  3  Ex.  xiii.  15  f.  ;  Num.  iii.  13  ;  viii.  17. 
4  Deut.  xii.  6  f.,  11  f.,  17  f.  ;  xiv.  22-27  ;  xv.  19  f. ;  xxvi.  11  ;  comp. 

Lev.  xix.  24. 

^  Riehm,  Gesetzgehung  Mosis,  p.  44 ;  Graf,  Geschtl.  Bucher  des 
A.  r.,  p.  47  ;   [Wellhausen,  pp.  156  f.]. 

6  Deut.  xiv.  28  f. ;  xxvi.  12  f.  "^  Num.  xviii.  8-32. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  65 

crease  the  revenues  of  the  priesthood,  ^  as  well  as 
attempts  to  modify  one  of  the  essential  features  of  the 
sacrifices,  by  making  of  these  sacred  acts,  hitherto  occa- 
sions for  joyful  family  repasts,  purely  ecclesiastical 
ceremonies.^ 

4.  Prayer.  —  The  religious  act  most  universally 
practised,  that  to  which  man  feels  himself  most  natu- 
rally inclined,  is  prayer.  The  whole  Old  Testament 
gives  proof  that  it  was  always  in  use  among  the  Israel- 
ites. It  doubtless  accompanied  the  offering  of  sacri- 
fices.^ The  law,  however,  contains  no  command  on 
the  subject,  perhaps  because  the  universal  practice  of 
prayer  rendered  any  command  of  this  kind  superfluous, 
or  because  it  was  believed  impossible  to  regulate  so 
spontaneous  an  act  of  the  soul.  Deuteronomy  gives 
only  the  formula  to  be  employed  when  the  first-fruits 
of  the  land  and  the  tithes  are  offered,*  and  document  C 
prescribes  the  benediction  that  the  priests  are  to  pro- 
nounce upon  the  people.^  This  document  also  in  cer- 
tain cases  enjoins  the  confession  of  sins.^ 

It  is  the  Psalms  that  furnish  the  most  examples  of 
prayers  used  among  the  Israelites.  In  them,  as  indeed 
in  many  other  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  appears 
the  full  and  complete  assurance  that  all  possible  mate- 
rial and  spiritual  blessings  may  be  obtained  by  prayer, 
and  the  belief  that  God  can  grant  anything  if  it  seems 
to  him  good. 

1  Graf,  pp.  47  ff. ;  Wellhausen,  pp.  156  f. ;  Reuss,  Histoire  Sainte, 
I.  pp.  170  f. 

2  Wellhausen,  pp.  69  ff.,  76  ff. 

2  Gen.  xii.  8  ;  xxvi.  25  ;  1  Sam.  vii,  9  ;  Job  xlii.  8  ;  1  Chron.  xxi.  26. 
4  Deut.  xxvi.  5-10,  13-15.  s  j^um.  vi,  24-26. 

6  Lev.  xvi.  21 ;  Num.  v.  7. 


66       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

5.  Voivs. — Vows  also  are  among  the  oldest  religious 
practices  of  the  Israelites.  A  vow  was  more  than  a 
prayer,  more  than  a  mere  word ;  it  was  an  act,  general^ 
a  sacrifice,  by  which  one  sought  to  win  or  retain  the 
divine  favor.  Document  A  shows  us  Jacob  on  his  flight 
to  Mesopotamia  making  the  vow  that,  if  Jehovah  will 
guard  and  bless  him,  he  will  take  him  for  his  God,  rear 
a  sanctuary  to  him  and  pay  him  tithes. ^  But  the  most 
touching,  tragic  vow  is  that  of  Jephthah.  He  prom- 
ises God  that  if  he  will  give  him  victory  over  the 
Ammonites,  he  will  offer  to  him  as  a  burnt  offering 
whatever  comes  out  of  his  house  on  his  return.  But  it 
is  his  daughter,  whom  he  first  meets ;  therefore,  at  the 
end  of  two  months,  he  fulfils  upon  her  the  vow  that  he 
has  uttered. 2  Saul  makes  the  people  promise  under 
oath  not  to  eat  anything  until  evening,  until  he  has 
been  avenged  upon  his  enemies;  and  Jonathan,  who 
does  not  keep  this  vow  because  he  knows  nothing  of  it, 
only  escapes  being  put  to  death  by  the  intercession  of 
the  people  for  him  with  the  king,  his  father:^  so  sacred 
and  irrevocable  were  vows  and  oaths  considered.  Absa- 
lom claims  to  have  made  the  following  vow  during  his 
sojourn  in  Geshur:  "If  Jehovah  will  bring  me  back  to 
Jerusalem,  I  will  serve  him,"*  —  evidently  by  offering 
to  him  sacrifices. 

Although  vows  were  customary  among  the  Israelites 
of  antiquity,  the  law  pays  little  attention  to  them.  The 
oldest  legislation  of  the  Pentateuch  says  nothing  at  all 
about  them.  Deuteronomy,  presupposing  the  custom 
of  making  vows  to  Jehovah,  declares  that  one  is  per- 

1  Gen.  xxviii.  20-22  ;  xxxi.  13.  2  j^d.  xi.  30-40. 

«  1  Sam.  xiv.  24  ff.,  36  ft.  *  2  Sam.  xv.  7  f. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  6.   WORSHIP.  67 

fectly  free  in  the  matter;  that  it  is  not  a  sin  not  to  make 
vows,  but  that  those  made  must  be  fulfilled,  and  that  as 
soon  as  possible. ^  This  declaration  shows  that  the 
Deuteronomist  knew  nothing  of  a  divine  law  requiring 
vows,  otherwise  he  would  not  have  said  that  it  was  not  a 
sin  not  to  make  them.  As  for  document  C,  it  confines 
itself  to  giving  rules  that  must  be  observed  in  fulfilling 
vows.^  Most  of  the  other  passages  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment bearing  on  this  subject  prove  that  vows  played 
an  important  part  in  Israelitish  piety,  and  that  fidelity 
required  their  exact  fulfilment.^ 

The  foregoing  discussion  shows  that  vows  were  a 
means  of  rendering  God  favorable,  and  especially  of 
securing  his  help  at  critical  junctures,  in  the  presence 
of  great  danger.  The  fulfilment  of  the  vow  after 
some  deliverance  or  blessing,  naturally  became  an  ex- 
pression of  gratitude  toward  God. 

6.  The  Anathema.  —  A  peculiar  vow,  to  which  refer- 
ence is  made  in  document  A  and  elsewhere,  consisted 
in  anathematizing  persons  or  things,  placing  them 
under  ban,  or  devoting  them  to  destruction.  Thus  the 
Canaanitish  peoples  Avere  placed  under  ban  by  command 
of  Jehovah,  because  these  peoples  were  idolaters.*  The 
Israelites,  also,  who  became  idolaters,  or  enticed  their 
brethren  thereto,  were  devoted  to  extermination.^     Any 

1  Deut.  xxiii.  21-23  ;  comp.  Eccl.  v.  3-6. 

2  Lev.  vii.  16  ;  xxii.  18 ;  xxvii.  1  ff.  ;  Num.  xv.  3  ;  xxx.  3  ff, 

3  Isa,  xix.  21 ;  Nah.  i.  15  ;  Jon.  i.  16  ;  ii.  9  ;  Job  xxii.  27  ;  Prov.  xx. 
25  ;  Ps.  xxii.  25 ;  1.  14  ;  Ivi.  12 ;  Ixi.  8  ;  Ixv.  1 ;  Ixvi.  13  ;  Ixxvi.  11 ; 
cxvi.  14,  18. 

4  Josh.  ii.  10  ;  vi.  17-21  ;  viii.  26  ;  x.  28-42  ;  xi.  10-22  ;  Jud.  i.  17  ; 
1  Sam.  XV.  2-33  ;  Deut.  ii.  34  ;  iii.  6  ;  vii.  1  ff. ;  xx.  16-18. 

s  Ex.  xxii.  20  \  Deut.  xiii. 


68  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAIklBNT. 

one  who  appropriated  an  object  anathematized  was  him- 
self placed  under  ban,^  as  was  Achan.^ 

The  people  Israel  could,  of  their  own  accord,  place 
under  ban  men  and  things.  This  was  done  in  the  case 
of  the  inhabitants  of  Jabesh-gilead,^  and  the  cities  be- 
longing to  the  king  of  Arad.*  But  every  individual 
Israelite  could  also  place  certain  objects  or  men  under 
ban.^ 

Thus  it  appears  that,  in  general,  anathema  consisted 
in  sacrificing  something  or  some  one  to  the  divine  wrath 
by  extermination,  and  that  the  anathema  was  pronounced 
upon  what  displeased  Jehovah.  He  who,  of  his  own 
motion,  placed  something  under  ban,  did  so  to  please 
God  by  satisfying  his  anger.  The  anathema  is,  how- 
ever, Lev.  xxvii.  28,  treated  in  a  manner  not  very 
different  from  other  vows  by  which  things  are  devoted 
to  the  service  of  Jehovah.^ 

7.  The  Nazirate.  —  Samson  is  the  first  nazirite  men- 
tioned in  history.  He  was  consecrated  to  God  from 
his  mother's  womb  by  command  of  the  angel  of  Jeho- 
vah."^ While  she  was  pregnant  with  him,  she  was  not 
allowed  to  drink  wine  or  strong  drink,  or  eat  anything 
impure.^  As  for  him,  he  could  never  shave  his  head.^ 
The  same  obligation  is  assumed  for  Samuel,  who  was 
also  a  nazirite.  ^^  Amos  reproaches  the  Israelites,  be- 
cause, among  other  instances  of  unfaithfulness,  they 
made  the  nazirites  drink  wine,  which  nazirites  accord- 
ing to  him  were  raised  up  by  God  like  the  prophets." 

1  Josh.  vi.  18  ;  Deut.  vii.  26  ;  comp.  xiii.  17.      ^  josh.  vii. 

8  Jud.  xxi.  10  f.  *  Num.  xxi.  1-3.  ^  Lev.  xxvii.  28  f. 

6  See  Dillmann,  i.l.     "^  Jud.  xiii.  2-5.  «  j^d.  xiii.  4,  7,  14. 

9  Jud.  xiii.  5 ;  xvi.  17,  19  ff.,  22  ff.        lo  1  Sam.  i.  11.-        "  ii.  11  f. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  69 

Samuel  was  at  once  a  nazirite  and  a  prophet.  The 
early  legal  documents  take  no  account  of  the  naz irate. 
Document  C  is  the  only  one  that  speaks  of  it:  Num. 
vi.  presupposes  the  existence  of  this  institution,  and 
regulates  it  according  to  the  principles  of  Levitism. 
Although  Samson  and  Samuel  were  nazirites  for  life, 
it  has  reference  only  to  the  temporary  nazirate.  Is  this 
an  innovation  ?  What  seems  one  is  the  regulation  that 
we  find,  vv.  6  ff.,  according  to  which  the  nazirite  is 
defiled  by  contact  with  a  corpse;  for  Samson  often 
came  into  contact  with  dead  bodies,^  without  ceasing 
to  be  a  nazirite;  and  Samuel,  in  spite  of  his  vows, 
hewed  in  pieces  King  Agag,  and  that  before  Jehovah. ^ 
Beyond  these  passages  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  do  not  mention  the  nazirate.  There  are 
references  to  it,  1  Mace.  iii.  49  and  Acts  xxi.  23  f.,  in 
the  sense  of  document  C.  John  the  Baptist,  on  the 
other  hand,  was  a  nazirite,  all  his  life,  like  Samson  and 
Samuel.^ 

The  leading  idea  connected  with  the  nazirate  is  that 
of  special  consecration  to  Jehovah.  This  follows  even 
from  the  term  nazir^  which  is  used  to  designate  the 
nazirite,  and  which,  like  qadhosh,  holy,  implies  the  idea 
of  separation  from  the  common  or  profane  world  and  of 
consecration  to  God.  Samson  is  called  nazir  of  God,^ 
which  Segond  and  Reuss  correctly  render  consecrated  to 
God.  Document  C  says  that  the  nazirite  shall  be 
consecrated  (^qadhosh)  to  Jehovah,^  just  as  it  says  Qf 
the  priest.^ 

Starting  from  this  leading  idea  of  the  nazirate,  the 

1  See  especially  Jud.  xiv.  19.        ^  i  gam.  xv.  33.  3  Luke  i.  15. 

*  Jud.  xiii.  5,  7  ;  xvi.  17.  ^  Num.  vi.  8.  ^  Lev.  xxi.  7. 


70  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

details  concerning  it  become  explicable.  The  mother 
of  Samson,  while  she  was  pregnant,  was  not  permitted 
to  eat  anything  impure  or  drink  wine,  and  the  nazirites 
themselves  were  forbidden  to  drink  wine  or  come  into 
contact  with  a  dead  body.  These  same  regulations 
apply,  at  least  in  part,  to  the  priests.  The  object  is 
to  keep  them  in  a  healthy  condition,  as  required  by  their 
special  consecration  to  Jehovah.  They  evidently  have 
the  same  object  when  applied  to  the  nazirites. 

Strict  abstinence  from  wine  among  the  latter,  how- 
ever, seems  to  have  had  its  real  origin  in  the  nomadic 
life  of  the  ancient  Hebrews,  and  is  best  explained  as  a 
relic  of  the  customs  of  that  sort  of  life,  in  harmony  with 
what  Jeremiah  tells  us  of  the  Rechabites.^  They,  in 
obedience  to  the  command  of  one  of  their  ancestors, 
not  only  abstained  from  wine,  but  also  renounced  the 
principal  advantages  of  civilization.  Customs  hal- 
lowed by  time,  indeed,  readily  pass  for  sacred;  they 
become  a  part  of  one's  religion;  it  would  be  thought 
wrong  to  replace  them  by  new  usages.  Among  other 
peoples  also,  abstinence  from  wine  was  regarded  as  nec- 
essary to  the  enjoyment  of  unusual  health.^ 

The  most  original  feature  is  that  which  forbids  the 
nazirite  to  shave  his  head.  He  must  preserve  his  hair 
inviolate.  This  is  called  the  consecration  of  God;^  it 
is,  as  it  were,  the  sign  characteristic  of  it.  The  ex- 
planation of  this  feature  is  probably  to  be  sought  in  the 
general  idea  that  everything  that  men  touch  and  form  or 

1  Jer.  XXXV.  2  ff. 

2  Bibel-Lexikon,  IV.  p.  289  ;  Handworterbuch,  p.  1060 ;  [Schultz,  I. 
pp.  161  f. ;  W.  R.  Smith,  Prophets^  pp.  84,  388  f. ;  Bible  Commentary, 
on  Num.  vi.  4].  ^  Num.  vi.  7. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  71 

use  belongs  to  the  domain  of  the  profane,  and  that  every- 
thing that  is  destined  for  a  sacred  end  must,  as  far  as 
possible,  be  pure,  unaltered  by  the  hand  of  man.  Indeed, 
he  who  gathers  grapes  for  the  first  time  from  a  newly 
planted  vine,  profaiies  it,  as  Deut.  xx.  6  and  xxviii. 
30  says  in  the  original.  In  building  an  altar  conse- 
crated to  Jehovah,  rough  stones  must  be  used,  because 
man  would  profane  them  by  using  a  chisel  on  them.i 
The  sacred  victims  must  never  have  borne  the  yoke  or 
been  used  for  ordinary  labor. ^ 

The  hair  plays  a  particularly  important  part  in  the 
naz irate,  but  this  fact  accords  with  a  custom  found 
among  other  peoples  of  antiquity. ^ 

8.  Fasting.  —  Fasting  is  a  religious  exercise  an- 
ciently, and  even  in  our  own  day,  very  widely  practised 
among  the  peoples  of  the  Orient,  where  abstinence  from 
food  produces  less  inconvenience  than  in  our  coun- 
tries. The  Israelites  also  always  had  the  custom  of 
fasting.  Fasting  often  accompanied  prayer  or  the 
offering  of  sacrifices;  there  were  united  with  it  other 
signs  of  humility,  contrition,  affliction:  the  subject 
mourned,  wept,  clothed  himself  in  sackcloth,  sat  on  the 
ground,  rent  his  garments,  plucked  out  his  hair;  re- 
course was  had  to  fasting,  especially  in  times  of  mis- 
fortune and  sorrow,  in  cases  of  public  or  private 
'Calamity,*  to  secure  divine  assistance  in  the  presence 

1  Ex.  XX.  25. 

2  Num.  xix.  2 ;  Deut.  xv.  19  ;  xxi.  3  ;  1  Sam.  vi.  7. 

3  Bibel-Lexikon,  IV.  p.  290 ;  Handw'orterhuch,  p.  1061  ;  [Ewald, 
Antiquities^  p.  86]. 

*  Jud.  XX.  26  ;  1  Sam.  i.  7  ;  xx.  34  ;  xxxi.  13  ;  2  Sam.  i.  11  f. ;  xii. 
16  f.,  22  f.  ;  Joel  i.  14 ;  ii.  12,  15  ;  Neh.  i.  4 ;  Esth.  iv.  1-3;  Ps.  xxxv. 
13  ;  Ixix.  10  f. ;  cix.  24. 


72  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

of  danger  and  to  avert  a  misfortune,^  to  express  feelings 
of  repentance,  and  to  obtain  pardon  for  sins.^  In  some 
exceptional  cases  fasting  is  represented  as  the  means 
employed  by  men  of  God  that  they  may  enjoy  the 
presence  of  Jehovah  and  obtain  revelations  from 
him.  3 

The  earlier  legal  portions  of  the  Pentateuch  pay  no 
attention  to  fasting.  But  document  C  gives  some  rules 
touching  the  fast  that  a  married  woman  vows  to  per- 
form.^ It  also  prescribes  that  the  day  of  atonement  be 
a  day  of  fasting,^  so  that  here  especially  this  practice 
appears  as  the  expression  of  the  humiliation  of  a  sinful 
people  before  a  holy  God,  and  as  the  means  of  appeas- 
ing God  and  obtaining  his  forgiveness.  The  Jews 
celebrated  four  other  fast-days  a  year,  in  memory  of  the 
principal  events  that  foreshadowed  and  consummated 
the  capture  and  overthrow  of  Jerusalem.^ 

The  prophets  felt  the  necessity  of  opposing  the  abuses, 
to  which  fasting  as  a  purely  external  act  gave  rise,  and 
of  showing  that  such  a  fast  could  neither  please  God 
nor  secure  his  blessings ;  they  required  of  the  people 
feelings  and  actions  corresponding  to  this  religious  act.'^ 
But  in  the  midst  of  Judaism  these  abuses  only  con- 
tinued to  develop.     Fasting  was  practised   more  fre- 

1  1  Sam.  xiv.  24  ;  1  Kings  xxi.  27-29  ;  2  Chron.  xx.  3  f,  ;  Ezra  viii. 
21,  23  ;  Esth.  iv.  15  f. 

2  Deut.  ix.  18  ;  1  Sam.  vii.  6  ;  Jon.  iii.  5,  7 ;  1  Kings  xxi.  9,  12  ; 
Ezra  ix.  3-5  ;  x.  6  ;  Neh.  ix.  1  f .  ;  Dan.  ix.  3  ff. 

3  Ex.  xxxiv.  28  ;  Deut.  ix.  9  ;  Dan.  x.  1  ff.,  11  ff. ;  comp.  Matt.  iv.  2. 
*  Num.  XXX.  14,  16. 

5  Lev.  xvi.  29,  31  ;  xxiii.  27,  29,  32  ;  Num.  xxix.  7. 

6  Zech.  viii  19  ;  vii.  .3-5  ;  comp.  Jer.  xli.  1  ff. ;  Hi.  4,  6  f.,  12  f. 
^  Isa.  Iviii.  3-7  ;  Zech.  vii.  5-10  ;  viii.  16-19  ;  Joel  ii.  12  f. 


FIRST  PERIOD.  —  §  6.   WORSHIP.  73 

quently,  and  the  fasts  became  longer ;  it  appeared  more 
and  more  as  a  meritorious  act.^ 

The  preceding  discussion  has  shown  what  was  the 
idea  and  the  religious  value  of  fasting.  Like  sacri^ 
fices,  prayer,  vows,  it  was  a  means  of  winning  the 
divine  favor.  But  it  was  also  a  sign  of  repentance 
and  humiliation,  a  means  of  averting  imminent  mis- 
fortunes, a  symbol  of  mourning  and  affliction,  a  practice 
seemly  in  imploring  the  forgiveness  of  God. 

9.  Purification  and  Levitical  Purity.  —  Religious 
purifications  are  a  custom  among  many  peoples  ancient 
as  well  as  modern. ^  We  find  them  also  among  the 
HebrcAvs.  Even  the  early  documents  teach  us  that, 
before  approaching  Jehovah,  the  body  had  to  be  cleansed 
by  ablutions  and  the  garments  changed  or  washed  ;3 
that  persons  defiled  by  any  impurity  could  not  partici- 
pate in  religious  solemnities  or  touch  sacred  things ;  ^ 
that  lepers  were  unclean  and  obliged  to  remain  outside 
the  Israelitish  camp;^  that  cohabitation  between  man 
and  woman  rendered  them  both  unclean ;  ^  that  a  dis- 
tinction was  to  be  made  between  clean  and  unclean 
animals ;  ^  that  it  was  forbidden  to  eat  flesh  torn  in  the 
fields,^  a  kid  cooked  in  its  mother's  milk^  or  blood. 1*^ 
Still  other  passages  show  that  the  Israelites  considered 

1  Esth.  iv.  16  ;  Judith  iv.  8  ff.  ;  viii.  5  f.  ;  Tob.  xii.  8  ;  2  Mace.  xiii. 
12  ;  Matt.  vi.  16  ;  ix.  14  ;  Luke  ii.  37  ;  xviii.  12. 

2  Bihel-Lexikon,  V.  pp.  65,  69. 

3  Gen.  XXXV.  2  ;  Ex.  xix.  10  ff.  ;  Josh.  iii.  5  ;  1  Sam.  xvi.  5. 
*  1  Sam.  XX.  26  ;  xxi.  5  f. 

5  Num.  xii.  9-15. 

6  Ex.  xix.  15  ;  1  Sam.  xxi.  5 ;  2  Sam.  xi.  4. 

T  Gen.  vii.  2,  8 ;  viii.  20.  s  Ex.  xxii.  31. 

9  Ex.  xxiii.  19 ;  xxxiv.  26.  lo  i  Sam.  xiv.  32-^4. 


74  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

it  an  important  duty  to  abstain  from  all  unclean  food.^ 
Deuteronomy  gives  some  regulations  on  this  subject. 
It  contains  a  list  of  clean  and  unclean  animals. ^  It 
also  forbids  the  eating  of  animals  torn  in  the  field  ^  as 
well  as  blood.*  It  commands  that  the  criminal  con- 
demned to  the  gallows  be  buried  on  the  day  of  the  exe- 
cution, that  he  may  not  defile  the  land.^  It  would 
exclude  from  the  camp  every  one  who  has  had  a  noctur- 
nal emission,  and  remove  from  sight  human  excre- 
ments.^ 

It  is,  however,  only  document  C  that  presents  a  com- 
plete system  of  regulations  for  cases  of  uncleanness.  It 
represents  as  dating  from  the  time  of  Noah  the  prohibi- 
tion against  eating  blood,  and  alleges  as  the  reason  for 
it  that  the  blood  is  the  soul  of  all  flesh.  ^  It  repeats  this 
prohibition  several  times  in  the  legal  portion,  adding 
to  it  that  against  eating  fat.^  It  devotes,  besides,  a 
whole  series  of  chapters  to  cases  of  uncleanness.  It 
teaches  that  uncleanness  results  from  eating  unclean 
animals,  or  touching  the  dead  body  of  an  animal ;  ^  that 
a  woman  becomes  unclean  in  childbirth,  ^^  and  lepers  by 
virtue  of  their  disease ;  ^^  that  gonorrhea,  whether  pro- 
duced by  diseased  or  other  conditions,  in  man,  and 
menstruation,  natural  or  unnatural,  in  woman,  produce 
a  state  of  uncleanness. ^^  Further,  the  same  document 
declares  that  any  one  who  is  brought  into  contact  with 
a  human  corpse  is  equally  unclean.  ^^ 

1  Hos.  ix.  3  ;  Zech.  ix.  7  ;  Ezek.  iv.  14  ;  xxxiii.  25  ;  Isa.  Ixv.  4 ; 
Ixvi.  17  ;  Dan.  i.  8-16  ;  2  Mace.  vii. 

2  xiv.  3-20.  3  xiv.  21.  4  xii.  16,  23-25  ;  xv.  23. 
fi  xxi.  23.                           6  xxiii.  9-14.  '''  Gen.  ix.  4. 

8  Lev.  iii.  17  ;  vii.  22-27  ;  xvii.  10-14  ;  xix.  26.  9  Lev.  xi. 

10  Lev.  xii.        "  Lev.  xiii.  f.         12  Lev.  xv.        i3  Num.  xix.  11-22, 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  75 

As  to  the  purifications  that  must  be  undertaken  in 
case  of  uncleanness,  they  are  very  various.  In  certain 
cases,  one  remained  unclean  until  evening,  but  no 
special  purification  was  required  ;i  uncleanness  doubt- 
less ceased  with  the  day  on  which  it  was  contracted. 
In  other  cases  one  had  to  bathe  or  wash  one's  garments, 
or  both,  or  even  shave  off  all  one's  hair.^  In  still  other 
cases  a  more  complicated  and  important  process  of  puri- 
fication became  necessary:  a  woman  after  childbirth 
could  only  be  purified  by  sacrifices ;  ^  a  leper  must  offer 
sacrifices  in  addition  to  performing  the  cleansing  cere- 
monies prescribed ;  *  it  was  the  same  with  a  man  healed 
of  gonorrhea  and  a  woman  cured  of  a  menstrual  flux ;  ^ 
finally,  one  who  had  been  defiled  by  contact  with  a 
corpse  was  obliged  to  be  purified  by  means  of  the  water 
of  purification,  whose  preparation  and  use  are  described. 
Num.  xix. 

As  to  the  real  significance  of  these  customs  and  regu- 
lations, there  is  great  difference  of  opinion  among  schol- 
ars.^ The  Old  Testament,  however,  gives  precise 
information  on  this  subject.  It  is  because  Jehovah  is 
holy  that  his  people  must  be  holy  and  therefore  free 
from  all  defilement:  this  is  the  teaching  of  the  three 
principal  documents  of  the  Pentateuch.  ^  It  is  because 
the  holy  God  dwells  in  the  midst  of  his  people,  that 

1  Lev.  xi.  24,  27,  31,  39  ;  xiv.  46  ;  xv.  10,  19,  23  ;  Num.  xix.  21  f. 

2  Lev.  xi.  25,  28,  40  ;  xiii.  6,  34  ;  xiv.  18  f.,  47  ;  xv.  5  ff.,  16,  18,  21  f., 
27  ;  xvii.  15  ;  xxii.  4-7  ;  Num.  xix.  19,  21 ;  xxxi.  24  ;  Deut.  xxiii.  10  f. 

3  Lev.  xii.  6-8.  *  Lev.  xiv.  2  ff. 

5  Lev.  XV.  14  f.,  29  f. 

6  Dillmann,  Exodus  u.  Leviticus,  pp.  476  ff,,  483  ;  [Schaff-Herzog, 
Encyclopcedia,  art.  Purification']. 

7  Ex.  xxii.  31 ;  Deut.  xiv.  21 ;  Lev.  xi.  44 ;  xx.  25  f. 


76  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

there  must  be  no  defilement  in  them ;  ^  for  it  would 
communicate  itself  to  the  sanctuary,  the  dwelling  of 
Jehovah,  and  would  have  to  be  punished  with  death. ^ 
For  this  reason  also  the  unclean  must  remain  outside 
the  camp. 3 

In  order  to  understand  the  thought  that  inspired 
these  laws,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  ancients 
did  not,  like  us,  distinguish  between  moral  and  exter- 
nal impurity  or  imperfection.  This  is  the  reason  why 
the  Israelites  regarded  them  both  as  equally  repugnant 
to  the  holiness  of  Jehovah.  The  priests,  also,  and  the 
victims  offered  in  sacrifice  had  to  be  without  physical 
blemish,^  and  those  who  performed  duties  at  the  sanc- 
tuary, on  the  occasion  of  their  consecration  and  before 
fulfilling  their  office,  were  obliged  to  take  a  full  or 
partial  bath,  wash  their  garments,  and  even  shave  their 
bodies.^  One  who  thoroughly  appreciates  this  point 
of  view  will  understand  how  there  could  be  such  a  thing 
as  leprosy  in  garments  or  houses  requiring  purifying 
ceremonies;^  why  the  regulation,  Deut.  xxiii.  12  f., 
to  which  we  have  already  referred,  was  made ;  and  why 
it  was  necessary  to  be  in  a  state  of  cleanness  to  touch 
sacred  things,  objects  consecrated  to  Jehovah.^  Thus 
also,  in  the  main,  are  explained  the  provisions  that  pre- 
vented contact  between  Jehovah  and  anything  defiled 

1  Deut.  xxiii.  14 ;  Num.  v.  3.  2  j^ev.  xv.  31  ;  Num.  xix.  13. 

3  Lev.  xiii.  46  ;  xiv.  3,  8 ;  Num.  v.  2-4  ;  xii.  14  f, ;  xxxi.  19  f.  ; 
Deut.  xxiii.  10  f . 

4  Lev.  xxi.  17  ft.  ;  xxii.  19  ff. 

6  Ex.  xxix.  4;  xxx.  19-21  ;  xL  12,  31  f. ;  Lev.  viii.  6 ;  xvi.  4,  24  ; 
Num.  viii.  7,  21. 

6  Lev.  xiii.  47  ff. ;  xiv.  33  ff. 

'  Lev.  vii.  19  f. ;  xii.  4  ;  xxii.  2  ff.  ;  Num.  ix.  6  ff.  ;  xviii.  11,  13. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  77 

or  profane.  Be  it  remembered,  moreover,  that  Jehovah 
was  the  King  of  Israel.  Just  as  respect  for  a  king  dic- 
tates that  one  should  not  present  one's  self  before  him 
except  in  a  perfectly  cleanly  condition,  so  likewise  it 
behooved  one  not  to  appear  before  this  divine  sovereign 
or  live  in  his  presence,  defiled  by  any  sort  of  unclean- 
ness.  Finally,  everything  that  produces  repugnance 
in  man  was  evidently  regarded  as  producing  the  same 
effect  upon  God. 

It  is  more  difficult  to  say  why  the  law  condemns  only 
certain  forms  of  external  uncleanness,  why  it  represents 
one  animal  as  clean  or  unclean  and  not  another;  for  the 
Old  Testament  gives  no  explanation  on  this  subject. 
A  part  of  these  regulations,  however,  are  easy  to  ex- 
plain. Thus  many  forms  of  disease  and  defilement, 
such  as  leprosy  and  death,  inspire  in  man  dread  or  dis- 
gust :  he  feels  a  strong  antipathy  toward  them.  This 
is  equally  true  of  certain  animals.  Purifying  rites,  in 
warm  countries,  and  abstinence  from  certain  foods  have, 
besides,  an  evident  utility.  Guided  by  experience  on 
the  one  hand  and  tradition  on  the  other,  the  Israelites 
naturally  and  necessarily  accustomed  themselves  to  the 
practices  of  which  we  have  spoken,  and  to  which  the 
legislators  did  not  until  later  give  the  religious  and 
theocratic  character  shown  to  have  been  impressed  upon 
them.i  It  is,  indeed,  certain  that  we  are  here  brought 
face  to  face  with  customs  whose  origin  is  lost  in  the 
gloom  of  antiquity,  customs  for  the  most  part  common 
to  a  majority  of  ancient  peoples. 

Under  the  rubric  of  cleanness  must  be  placed  a  series 

1  De  Wette,  Archeologie,  §  188 ;  Bihel-Lexikon,  V.  pp.  354  ff. ; 
[Ewald,  Antiquities,  pp,  144  f.]. 


78  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

of  other  directions  that  are  found  mostly  in  Lev.  xviii.- 
XX.  The  regulations  contained  in  this  passage  have 
properly  been  called  the  laws  of  holiness.  They,  more 
than  all  the  rest  of  the  code,  assert  that  their  object  is 
to  make  of  the  people  Israel  a  holy  people,  free  from 
all  defilement.^ 

To  be  a  people  holy  and  clean,  it  is  necessary  to 
avoid  especially  marriages  between  near  relatives,  incest, 
and  sexual  relations  contrary  to  nature. ^  Transgressors 
against  these  regulations  are  threatened  with  the  sever- 
est penalties. 2  It  is  the  same  with  those  who  commit 
other  acts  of  unchastity.^  The  best  illustration  how 
carefully  the  people  of  God  must  avoid  all  uncleanness 
of  this  sort,  is  the  fact  that  a  man  sprung  from  an  un- 
lawful union  cannot  enter  the  congregation  of  Jehovah 
even  to  the  tenth  generation.^ 

It  is  perhaps  to  prevent  acts  of  uncleanness  of  this 
nature  that  women  are  forbidden  to  wear  men's  cloth- 
ing, and  vice  versa.^  This  prohibition  may,  however, 
at  the  same  time  have  been  aimed  at  idolatrous  prac- 
tices.'' But  it  is  more  probable  that  it  was  inspired  by 
the  same  motive  as  other  laws  to  which  we  must  here 
refer.  Thus  it  is  forbidden  to  mate  beasts  of  two  differ- 
ent species,  to  sow  the  same  field  with  two  kinds  of 
seed,  to  wear  garments  woven  of  two  sorts  of  yarn,  to 
plough  with  an  ox  and  an  ass  harnessed  together.^   These 

1  Lev.  xviii.  24  ff. ;  xix.  2  ;  xx.  7,  26. 

2  Lev.  xviii.  6  ff. ;  Deut.  xxii.  30  ;  xxvii.  20-23. 

3  Lev.  xviii.  24  ff. ;  xx.  10  ff. ;  Ex.  xxii.  19. 

4  Lev.  xix.  29  ;  Deut.  xxii.  20-29 ;  Num.  v.  11-31 ;  comp.  xxv.  1-9. 
^  Deut.  xxiii.  2.  ^  Deut.  xxii.  5. 

■^  De  Wette,  Archeologie,  §  190  ;  [Ewald,  Antiquities,  p.  163]. 
8  Lev.  xix.  19  ;  Deut.  xxii.  9-11. 


FIRST   PERIOD.  —  §  6.    WORSHIP.  79 

directions  seem  to  be  based  on  the  idea  that  all  that 
comes  from  the  hand  of  God  is  good  and  clean;  that 
therefore,  the  character  given  to  a  creature  must  not 
be  changed,  and  that  such  a  change  would  be  a  profa- 
nation. ^ 

1  Dillmaun  on  Lev.  xix.  19  ;  [Ewald,  Antiquities,  pp.  160  f.]. 


SECOND   PERIOD. 


§  7.    PEOPHETISM  IN  ITS   PUKITT. 

We  have  now  come  to  the  prophetic  period  par  excel- 
lence. Prophetism  in  this  period  plays  a  leading  part, 
as  it  did  not  in  the  preceding ;  it  is  the  dominant  power 
in  the  midst  of  the  people  Israel.  It  appears  also  in  all 
its  purity,  freed  from  the  traditional  usages  encountered 
among  the  other  peoples  of  antiquity,  which  also  exer- 
cised a  powerful  influence  upon  the  early  prophets  of 
Israel.  These  latter  still  practised  the  art  of  divination, 
and  their  activity  was  not  unmixed  with  an  exaltati-on 
more  or  less  unhealthy;  the  prophets  of  our  period,  on 
the  other  hand,  are  preachers,  speaking  under  the  influ- 
ence of  divine  inspiration,  —  without,  however,  losing 
their  self-consciousness,  — and  allowing  themselves  to  be 
guided  by  political  events,  of  which  they  are  attentive 
observers.  Another  difference  to  be  noted  is,  that  the 
early  prophets  often  employed  carnal  and  violent  means 
in  support  of  the  cause  of  Jehovah.  Thus  Samuel  him- 
self hewed  Agag,  king  of  the  Amalekites,  in  pieces 
before  Jehovah,^  because  Saul  had  not  executed,  with 
respect  to  him,  the  stern  orders  that  he  had  received. 
Elisha  likewise  slaughtered  all  the  prophets  of  Baal.^ 
The  numerous  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  more- 

1  1  Sam.  XV.  33.  "  1  Kings  xviii.  40. 

81 


82  THEOLOGY   OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT. 

over,  which  enjoin  the  complete  extermination  of  the 
Canaanitish  peoples,  and  mostly  belong  to  the  oldest 
literature,  are  the  faithful  expression  of  the  spirit  that 
animated  primitive  prophetism.  The  means  that  later 
prophetism  uses  in  opposing  idolatry,  on  the  contrary, 
is  persuasion,  speech.  Finally,  the  early  prophets  often 
played  a  political  part;  they  did  not  hesitate  to  over- 
throw the  dynasties  that  favored  idolatry  or  did  not 
vigorously  enough  support  Jehovism,  to  replace  them  by 
new  ones.^  The  prophets  of  our  period  are  also  inter- 
ested in  public  affairs,  but  they  seldom  employ  other 
than  spiritual  means  to  attain  the  end  that  they  seek. 

The  literature  of  this  period  teaches  us  that  idolatry 
continued  to  prevail  in  Israel  until  the  Exile,  as  well 
as  the  su]oerstitious  usages  inseparable  from  it,  and 
especiall}^  the  art  of  divination.  But  genuine  prophet- 
ism vigorously  opposed  this  traditional  tendency ;  there 
was  thus  a  prophetism  that  was  low  and  rude,  false  and 
perfunctory,^  alongside  of  one  that  was  pure  and  spirit- 
ual, exalted  and  inspired;  or  rather  the  latter  freed 
itself  from  the  former  under  an  influence  from  on  high. 
Traditional  prophetism,  following  the  old  routine,  had 
forfeited  confidence  in  the  presence  of  a  new  and  higher 
religious  life;  hence  it  was  that  such  men  as  Amos, 
impelled  by  the  prophetic  spirit  to  leave  their  ordinary 
occupations,  refused  to  be  called  prophets  or  sons,  i.e. 
disciples  of  prophets,  in  the  sense  in  which  the  term 
had  hitherto  been  emplo3^ed.^ 

1  1  Sam.  XV.  17  ff. ;  xvi.  1  ff. ;  1  Kings  i.  11  ff.  ;  xi.  29  ff. ;  xiv.  6  ff.; 
xvi.  1  ff. ;  xxi.  17  ff. ;  2  Kings  ix.  1  ff. 

2  Mic.  iii.  5-7  ;  Zech.  x.  2 ;  Jer.  xxix.  8  f. ;  Ezek.  xiii.  17-23  ;  Isa. 
xliv.  26.  ^  Amos  vii.  14  f. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  7.   PROPHETISM  IN  ITS  PURITY.      83 

The  transformation  that  prophetism  underwent  is, 
moreover,  marked  by  the  difference  in  the  names  given 
to  the  prophets  at  different  epochs.  Originally  they 
were  called  seers;  they  did  not  take  the  name  proph- 
ets until  later, ^  and  then  probably  because  they  no 
longer  played  the  part  of  seers  or  diviners,  but  that  of 
prophets.  What,  then,  does  this  latter  title  mean  ?  The 
word  nabhi^  prophet,  is  interpreted  by  scholars  in  two 
w^ays.  Some  give  to  it  a  passive,  others  an  active,  sig- 
nification. According  to  the  former  the  prophet  is  above 
all  an  inspired  person;  according  to  the  latter  he  is 
chiefly  an  interpreter  of  the  will  of  God  among  men.^ 
But  whatever  may  be  the  exact  etymological  significa- 
tion of  the  term  in  question,  it  is  perfectly  certain  that 
the  prophets  are  regarded  at  the  same  time  as  inspired 
persons  and  as  interpreters  of  the  will  of  God,  as  men 
to  whom  the  will  of  God  has  been  revealed  by  inspira- 
tion in  order  that  they  may  communicate  it  to  their 
people.  This,  as  we  shall  see,  is  the  teaching  of  a  large 
number  of  passages.  For  the  diviner  or  the  seer,  the 
important  thing  is  the  sign,  the  omen,  that  he  sees 
and  observes ;  for  the  prophet  it  is,  on  the  one  hand,  in- 
spiration, and  on  the  other,  the  word  by  which  he  makes 
known  what  God  has  revealed  to  him.^ 

The  prophets  are  first  of  all  inspired  men.  They 
represent  themselves  as  filled  with  the  spirit  of  God 
and  directed  by  him  in  their  ministry.*     They  some- 

1 1  Sam.  ix.  9.  ^  Bleek,  Introduction,  §  178. 

3  Maybaum,  pp.  113  f. 

4  Mic.  iii.  8  ;  Ezek.  xi.  5  ;  Isa.  xlii.  1  ;  xlviii.  16  ;  Ixi.  1  ;  Zech.  vii.  12  ; 
comp.  Joel  ii.  28  ;  Num.  xi.  17,  25  ff.;  xxiv.  2  ;  1  Sam.  x.  6,  10  ;  xix. 
20,  23  J  2  Kings  ii.  9,  15  ;  Neli.  ix.  30. 


84       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

times  describe  the  action  of  the  divine  spirit  upon  them 
in  such  terms  as  these:  "The  hand  of  Jehovah  was 
on  me,"  i.e.  the  power  of  God  seized  me,  the  spirit  of 
God  being  regarded  as  a  force,  and  so  compared  to  the 
hand.^  The  prophet,  being  clothed  with  the  spirit  of 
God,  can,  therefore,  be  called  "a  man  of  the  spirit. "^ 

It  is  the  spirit  by  which  God  communicates  to  the 
prophets  his  revelations.  Indeed,  the  teaching  of  the 
passages  just  cited  is  that  the  spirit  of  God  is  granted 
the  prophets  that  he  may  reveal  to  them  his  will,  and 
they  ma}^  be  fitted  to  declare  his  word.^  God  reveals  to 
the  prophets  all  that  he  does.*  He  speaks  to  them  and 
he  speaks  through  them.^  The  prophets  also  claim  to 
declare  the  genuine  word  of  God,  and  say,  of  the  false 
prophets,  that  they  prophesy  what  comes  from  their  own 
hearts  and  not  what  comes  from  the  mouth  of  God,  God 
not  having  spoken  to  them.^ 

It  is  God  who  raises  up  the  prophets  and  sends  them 
to  his  people."  The  divine  call  made  itself  felt  by  the 
prophets  with  such  power  that  they  could  not  resist  it.^ 
They  were  convinced  that  they  would  take  upon  them- 
selves grave  responsibility  if  they  neglected  to  fulfil  the 
divine  commission  that  had  been  entrusted  to  them.^ 


1  Mic.  iii.  8  ;  Ezek.  iii.  14  ;  viii.  1-3  ;  comp.  i.  3  ;  iii.  22  ;  xxxiii.  22  ; 
xxxvii.  1  ;  xl.  1 ;  Isa.  viii.  11  ;  1  Kings  xviii.  46  ;  2  Kings  iii.  15. 

2  See  Hos.  ix.  7,  in  the  original. 

3  Comp.  2  Sam.  xxiii.  2  f . ;  1  Kings  xxii.  24  ;  Zech.  vii.  12. 

4  Amos  iii.  7.  5  Hos.  xii.  10. 

6  Jer.  xiv.  14 ;  xxiii.  16,  21 ;  Ezek.  xiii.  2  ff.,  7. 

■^  Amos  ii.  11  ;  vii.  15  ;  Isa.  vi.  8  ff.  ;  Jer,  i.  7  ;  vii.  25  ;  xxv.  4  ; 
xxvi.  5  ;  xxix.  15,  19 ;  xxxv.  15  ;  xliv.  4  ;  Ezek.  ii.  3  ;  iii.  4  ff.  ;  Zech. 
ii.  11  ;  iv.  9 ;  vi.  15. 

«  Amos  iii.  8  ;  Jer.  xx.  7-9.  ^  Ezek.  iii.  18,  20  ;  xxxiii.  8. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  7.    PROPHETISM  IN  ITS  PURITY.      85 

They  said  of  the  false  prophets  that  they  were  not  sent 
by  God.i 

It  is  already  clear  from  what  has  just  been  said  that 
the  prophets  were  God's  interpreters.  This  is  still 
clearer  from  Ex.  vii.  1  and  iv.  16.  In  the  former  of 
these  passages  Jehovah  says  to  Moses:  "See,  I  have 
made  thee  God  to  Pharaoh,  and  Aaron,  thy  brother, 
shall  be  thy  prophet."  This  means  that  there  shall  be 
between  Moses  and  Pharaoh  the  same  relation  as  be- 
tween God,  who  makes  known  his  will,  and  man,  to 
whom  this  will  is  revealed;  and  that  Aaron  shall  serve 
as  mediator  between  Moses  and  Pharaoh,  as  the  prophet 
mediates  between  God  and  man.  This  is  expressed 
still  more  clearly  in  the  second  passage,  in  which 
Jehovah  says  to  Moses  that  he  shall  take  the  place  of 
God  to  Aaron,  and  that  Aaron  shall  serve  as  his  mouth, 
and  speak  for  him  to  the  people.  This  is  the  sense  in 
which  Jeremiah  is  designated  as  the  mouth  of  God.^ 
The  prophets  are,  therefore,  God's  instruments;  God 
places  his  words  in  their  mouths,  and  they  say  what 
God  commands  them ;  ^  they  play  the  part  of  interpre- 
ters among  men.^ 

The  prophets  bear  other  titles  that  teach  us  what 
they  were  and  what  they  did.  They  are  called  watch- 
men and  guardians,  or  keepers,^  because  they  watched 
over  the  conduct  of  the  people,  that  they  might  rebuke 

1  Jer.  xiv.  14  f. ;  xxiii.  21 ;  xxvii.  15 ;  xxviii.  15 ;  xxix.  31 ;  Ezek. 
xiii.  6. 

2  Jer.  XV.  10. 

3  Deut.  xviii.  18  ;  Jer.  i.  9  ;  comp.  Num.  xxiii.  5,  12,  16. 

4  Isa.  xliii.  27. 

6  Mic.  vii.  4  ;  Jer.  vi.  17  ;  Ezek.  iii.  17  ;  xxxiii.  7  ;  Isa.  xxi.  11  f.  ; 
lii.  8  ;  Ivi.  10  ;  Ixii.  G. 


86       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

it  in  case  of  need.  This  is  plainly  expressed  in  three 
passages,  —  Jer.  vi.  27 ;  Ezek.  iii.  17 ;  xxxiii.  7.  In  the 
first,  God  speaks  to  the  prophet:  "I  have  placed  thee 
on  the  look-ont  among  my  people,  as  a  fortress,  that 
thou  mayst  know  and  search  their  ways  " ;  and  in  the 
other  two:  "I  have  set  thee  as  a  watchman  over  the 
house  of  Israel;  thou  shalt  hear  the  word  that  goeth 
forth  from  my  mouth,  and  thou  shalt  warn  them  for 
me."  In  accordance  with  this  line  of  thought  Jere- 
miah could  regard  himself  as  a  shepherd  of  his  people, ^ 
the  chief  care  of  a  shepherd  being,  not  only  to  feed 
his  flock,  but  to  watch  it  and  protect  it  from  all  danger. 
The  name  watchman  or  guardian,  when  applied  to  the 
prophets,  also  evidently  implies  the  idea  that  they  see 
better  than  others  what  is  going  to  happen,  what  ap- 
pears in  the  distance,  and  must  be  warded  from  the 
people.  Habakkuk  says  that  he  was  at  his  post,  that 
he  was  watching  on  the  top  of  the  tower,  listening  for 
what  Jehovah  might  say  to  him,  when  a  prophecy  con- 
cerning the  approaching  punishment  of  the  Chaldeans 
was  communicated  to  him.^  The  prophets  are  called 
men  of  God,^  on  account  of  the  peculiar  relation  that 
exists  between  them  and  God.  They  are  called  ser- 
vants of  Jehovah,*  because  they  consecrate  their  lives 
to  his  service,  and  envoys  or  messengers  of  Jehovah,^ 
because  they  are  commissioned  to  carry  his  commands. 

^  Jer,  xvii.  16  ;  comp.  Zech.  xi.  4  ff. 

2  ii.  1  ff. 

3  1  Sam.  ii.  27  ;  ix.  6  ff.  ;  1  Kings  xii.  22  ;  xiii.  1  ff. ;  xvii.   18,  24  ; 
XX.  28  ;  Jer.  xxxv.  4  ;  etc. 

4  Amos  iii.  7  ;    Isa.  xx.  3  ;  Jer.  xxv.  4  ;  xxvi.  5 ;  xxix.  19 ;  xxxv. 
15  ;  xliv.  4  ;  etc. 

s  Isa.  xliv.  26  ;  Hag.  i.  13  ;  Mai.  iii.  1. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  7.    PROPHETISM  IN  ITS  PURITY.      87 

Since  the  prophets  say,  on  every  page  of  their  writ- 
ings, that  they  declare  the  word  of  God,  and  that  God 
has  spoken  to  them,  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  ask  in 
what  this  word  consisted,  and  how  it  was  communicated 
to  the  prophets.  In  ancient  times  it  was  believed  in 
Israel  that  God  spoke  to  men  in  the  literal  sense  of 
this  word.i  This  is  certainly  the  sense  in  which  it  is 
said,  in  the  early  biblical  documents,  that  God  spoke  to 
Adam  and  his  descendants,  to  Noah  and  the  other  patri- 
archs, to  Moses  and  Joshua,  and  afterwards  to  the  judges 
and  the  prophets.  It  was  believed  that  God  caused  his 
voice  to  be  heard  in  speaking  to  men. 2  This,  however, 
is  not  the  sense  in  which  the  prophets  seem  to  have 
understood  the  matter.  Though  they  continued  to  use 
the  language  that  had  been  adopted  when  it  was  be- 
lieved that  God  spoke  after  the  manner  of  men,  the 
divine  word  addressed  to  them  was  certainly,  for  them, 
an  internal  word. 

The  prophets  also  called  their  prophecies  visions; 
but  they  did  so  in  imitation  of  the  language  of  a  time 
when  actual  visions  played  an  important  part  in  proph- 
etism.  Yet,  from  Philo  to  Hengstenberg,  this  form  of 
expression  has  been  made  the  basis  of  the  doctrine  that, 
at  the  time  of  receiving  revelations,  the  prophets  were  in 
an  ecstatic  and  entirely  passive  condition.  In  support 
of  this  theory,  appeal  is  made  to  the  words  above  cited, 
in  which  the  prophets  are  called  frenzied  or  insane  men ; 
stress  is  laid  on  the  condition  of  exaltation  and  prostra- 
tion into  which  Saul  is  thrown  by  prophetic  inspiration, 
on  the  condition,  somewhat  less  ecstatic,  of  Balaam,  at 

1  Gen.  xviii.  ;  Ex.  xxxiii.  11  ;  Num.  xii.  8. 

2  Ex.  XX.  1  ;  Deut.  iv.  12  ;  1  Sam.  iii.  4  ff. ;  1  Kings  xix.  13. 


88  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

the  time  of  uttering  his  oracles,  and  finally  on  Num. 
xii.  6-8,  which  says  that  while  Jehovah  speaks  to  Moses, 
mouth  to  mouth,  he  reveals  himself  to  the  other  proph- 
ets only  in  visions  and  dreams.^ 

All  this  proves  conclusively  that,  among  the  Israel- 
itish  prophets,  there  existed  something  like  glossolaly, 
an  inferior  degree  of  Christian  inspiration, ^  and  other 
analogous  phenomena  that  have  since  appeared  in  the 
church,  chiefly  under  the  influence  of  American  Metho- 
dism; but  it  does  not  prove  that  all  the  prophets  were 
in  this  condition  when  they  received  the  divine  word. 
Referring  to  the  prophetic  books,  one  discovers,  on  the 
contrary,  with  Bleek,^  Oehler,*  Schultz,^  and  others, 
that  the  prophets  generally  received  revelations  in  a 
perfectly  conscious  state  of  mind.  Reuss  shows,  by 
numerous  examples,  that  the  visions  mentioned  in  the 
prophetic  books  are  "only  symbolic  forms  of  thought 
and  consequently  simple  literary  contrivances,  rhetorical 
expedients,  stylistic  ornaments,  and  nothing  more."^ 
One  should  not  allow  one's  self  to  be  led  astray  by  the 
term  vision,  which  is  almost  a  synonym  for  prophetic 
and  divine  word."^  The  prophets  say  that  they  have  seen 
the  words  or  the  discourses  that  they  utter. ^  But  the 
passages  that  we  have  cited,  and  others,^  prove  that 
they  give  the  name  visions  to  discourses  that  have  ab- 

1  Tholuck,  Die  Propheten  und  Hire  Weissagnngen,  pp.  49  ff.;  [Smith, 
Dictionary,  art.  Prophet,  IV.]. 

2  1  Cor.  xiv.  3  §  183.  *  §  209  ff.  ^  I.  pp.  274  ff. 

6  Les  Prophetes,  I.  pp.  54  ff.  ;  comp.  Kuenen,  Hist.  Critique  des 
Livres  de  VA.  T.,  IL  pp.  40  ff.  ;  [Schultz,  I.  278  ff.]. 

■^  1  Sam.  iii.  1  ;  2  Sam.  vii.  17  ;  Hos.  xii.  10  ;  Isa.  xxx.  10  ;  Ezek.  i.1-3. 

8  Amos  i.  1  ;  Isa.  ii.  1  ;  xiii.  1  ;  Hab.  i.  1  ;  ii.  1 ;  comp.  2  Kings  viii.  13. 

9  Isa.  i.  1  ;  Ob.  1  :  Nah.  i.  1. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  7.   PROPHETISM  IN  ITS  PURITY.      89 

solutely  none  of  the  characteristics  of  a  vision,  that  are 
the  result  of  reflexion.  The  name  vision  is  given  even 
to  a  prophetic  writing  that  contains  historical  narratives.^ 
It  must,  however,  be  acknowledged  that  in  ancient 
times  the  term  vision  was  applied  to  visions  properly 
so  called.  In  the  passage  already  cited,  Num.  xii.  6-8, 
revelation  by  visions  and  dreams  is  contrasted  with 
direct  revelation,  received  by  Moses  in  a  conscious 
state,  and  the  latter  is  evidently  regarded  as  more  per- 
fect than  the  former.  In  imitation  of  this  passage  we 
feel  obliged  to  distinguish  between  two  different  points 
of  view  with  reference  to  prophetic  revelation,  the 
primitive  and  imperfect  on  the  one  hand,  and,  on  the 
other,  the  higher,  which  appears  in  the  prophetic  books. 
We  have  seen  that  dreams  and  visions  play  an  impor- 
tant part  in  early  prophetism,  and  that  it  was  disfigured 
by  other  imperfections.  But,  under  the  influence  of 
the  spirit  of  God,  prophetism  developed ;  it  freed  itself, 
little  by  little,  from  the  vulgar  art  of  divination  that 
it  might  fulfil  a  nobler  mission.  The  seers  became 
prophets,  God's  interpreters  among  men.  Then  dreams 
and  visions,  so  far  from  being  considered  the  means  of 
revelation  jt?ar  excellence^  were  rather  disparaged  as  an 
inferior  or  even  unreliable  source  of  revelation;  they 
were  contrasted  with  the  genuine  word,  to  which  they 
were  as  the  chaff  to  the  wheat. ^  It  is  only  the  book  of 
Daniel,  an  apocalypse,  by  the  way,  and  not  a  prophecy, 
in  which  dreams  and  visions  again  play  an  important 
part.  2 

1  2  Chron.  xxxii.  32. 

2  Jer.  xxiii.  25-32  ;  xxvii.  9  ;  xxix.  8  f.  ;  Zech.  x.  2  ;  Deut.  xiii.  1  ff. 
2  ii.  ;  iv.  :  vii.  f .  :  x.-xii. 


90       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

It  is  wrong,  therefore,  to  conclude  from  Num.  xii. 
6-8  that  no  prophet  except  Moses  received  divine 
revelation  otherwise  than  by  dreams  and  visions.  This 
is  ignoring  numerous  facts  on  the  testimony  of  a  single 
statement.  If,  instead  of  seeing  in  this  passage  a  dog- 
matic and  infallible  assertion,  we  regard  it  from  the 
historical  point  of  view,  we  shall  reach  the  following 
conclusion.  Since  it  forms  part  of  document  A,  it 
belongs  to  the  period  of  early  prophetism,  when  inspi- 
ration was  inseparable  from  a  sort  of  ecstasy,  when 
dreams  and  visions  were  the  customary  means  of  reve- 
lation. Our  author,  however,  had  sufficiently  sound 
ideas  to  perceive  the  imperfections  of  such  a  prophet- 
ism, and  took  pains  to  show  that  Moses  had  received 
revelations  of  a  higher  and  purer  sort.  Thus  it  appears 
that  ancient  prophetism  was  early  felt  to  be  imperfect. 

All  this  shows  that  those  who  claim  that,  the  prophets, 
when  inspired,  were  in  an  ecstatic  and  semi-conscious 
condition,  have  in  mind  primitive  and  imperfect  proph- 
etism, and  that  they  ignore  the  growth  of  prophetism 
from  the  divinatory  and  visionary  to  the  higher  stage 
that  we  have  shown  it  to  have  attained.  The  two  kinds 
of  Christian  inspiration  that  St.  Paul  describes,  1  Cor. 
xiv.,  evidently  have  a  close  analogy  with  the  two  kinds 
of  prophetism  in  ancient  Israel,  and,  as  the  apostle 
places  simple  evangelical  preaching  above  glossolaly,  so 
we  must  place  simple  prophetic  preaching  above  the 
earlier  ecstatic  prophetism.  Riehm  says,  and  justly, 
that  the  more  ecstatic  prophetic  inspiration  is,  the  more 
nearly  it  is  related  to  an  inferior  stage  of  prophetism. ^ 
And  Bertheau  declares,  with  no  less  justice,  that  the 
1  Messianic  Prophecy,  p.  25. 


SECOND  PERIOD. —  §  8.    UNITY  AND  SPIRITUALITY.      91 

history  of  prophetism  shows  that  the  less  constantly  the 
prophets  enjoyed  communion  with  God,  the  more  they 
were  inclined  to  represent  the  divine  power  as  an  ex- 
ternal force  taking  possession  of  them  and  making 
them  mere  instruments  of  its  will.^ 


§  8.    UNITY  AND  SPIEITUALITY  OF  GOD. 

We  must  now  explain  the  essential  principles  of  the 
theology  of  the  prophets,  if  indeed  the  employment  of 
so  pretentious  an  expression  is  allowable.  As  a  matter 
of  fact  the  prophets  had  no  theology.  They  were 
preachers,  not  theologians.  They  were  men  of  action, 
and  not  theorists  or  scientists.  What  engrossed  them 
was  practical  life,  not  theories,  abstract  ideas,  and  still 
less  a  theological  system.  One  finds  in  their  works 
profound  thoughts,  grand  religious  and  moral  princi- 
ples, but  not  a  theology  properly  so  called.  It  is, 
therefore,  better  to  speak  simply  of  the  religion  of  the 
prophets  than  of  their  theology  as  it  is  the  custom 
to  do. 

The  fundamental  idea  of  the  religion  of  the  prophets  is 
that  of  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  with  Israel ;  this  appears 
from  every  age  of  their  writings.  We  have  already 
discussed  it  in  the  preceding  pages,  because  from  the 
beginning  it  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  religion  of 
Israel.  What  we  now  have  to  examine  is,  first  of  all, 
the  idea  that  the  prophets  formed  of  the  God  of  the  cov- 
enant.    For  the  one  that  we  have  hitherto  met  is  not 

1  Jahrhucher  fur  deutsche  TheoL,  1859,  p.  610;  comp.  Kohler,  Der 
Proplietismus  der  Hehrder  und  die  Mantik  der  Griechen,  p.  97  ;  [W. 
R.  Smith,  Prophets,  pp.  219  ff.]. 


92       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

that  of  our  period.  The  prophets  have  risen  to  the  idea 
of  the  absolute  unity  of  God;  they  have  generally 
attained  to  much  purer  conceptions  of  the  Deity  than 
the  early  Israelites. 

I.    Unity  of  God. 

When  did  the  Israelites  begin  to  free  themselves 
from  primitive  and  imperfect  notions  to  rise  to  pure 
monotheism?  Baudissin,  in  the  excellent  treatise  which 
he  has  devoted  to  this  subject,  reaches  the  conclusion 
that  Israelitish  monotheism  passed  through  three  suc- 
cessive phases :  it  originally  consisted  in  the  worship  of 
a  single  national  god,  and  did  not  exclude  the  existence 
of  other  gods ;  in  this  form  it  existed  perhaps  among  the 
Hebrews  before  Moses ;  later,  especially  after  the  prophet 
Hosea,  they  rose  to  the  belief  in  a  single  God,  but  con- 
sidered solely  in  his  relations  to  Israel;  finally,  at  the 
time  of  Jeremiah,  they  attained  to  strict  monotheism, 
to  the  idea  of  a  single  God  for  all  the  peoples  of  the 
earth.  1     We  must  examine  this  question  more  closely. 

Document  A  represents  Jehovah  as  the  Creator  of 
the  universe,  and  the  God  of  the  parents  of  the  human 
race, 2  as  the  Lord  of  the  world, ^  who  destroys  again,  by 
the  deluge,  all  that  exists,*  who  confounds  the  speech 
of  all  men,  and  scatters  them  over  the  whole  earth. ^ 
whose  name  and  power  must  be  heralded  everywhere,^ 
who  judges  all  the   earth,'  and  executes    his    decrees 

1  Studien,  L  pp.  175  ff.  ;  [Montefiore,  pp.  134  ff.  ;  214  ff.]. 

2  Gen.  ii.-iv. 

3  Gen.  xiv.  19,  22  ;  xxiv.  3,  7  ;  Ex.  ix.  29 ;  xix.  5 ;  Num.  xiv.  21  ; 
Deut.  xxxii.  8,  22  ;  Josh.  ii.  11 ;  iii.  11,  13. 

4  Gen.  vi.  5  ff.  ^  Gen.  xi.  1-9. 

6  Ex.  ix.  16  ;  Josh.  iv.  24.  7  Qen.  xviii.  25. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  8.    UNITY  AND  SPIRITUALITY.      93 

among  all  nations,  ^  who  is  truly  the  God  of  the  spirits  of 
all  fiesh.2 

Here,  then,  in  document  A,  are  universal  conceptions 
sufficiently  decided  to  seem  to  imply  strict  monotheism, 
the  idea  that  Jehovah  is  the  sole  God  of  the  entire  world. 
It  is  not,  however,  absolutely  certain  that  this  is  the 
case.  In  ancient  times  the  creator  of  heaven  and  earth 
was  not  necessarily  regarded  as  the  only  God,  but  only 
as  the  supreme  God.^  Alongside  of  him  there  was  room 
for  other  gods,  quite  as  real  as  he,  but  inferior  to  him  in 
power  and  dignity.  Baudissin  justly  remarks  that  all 
the  heathen  peoples,  although  they  believed  in  the  reality 
of  foreign  gods,  narrated  the  history  of  primitive  human- 
ity as  if  their  gods  had  ruled  alone  at  that  time ;  that 
there  is  no  essential  difference  between  this  point  of 
view  and  that  taken  by  document  A  in  the  first  chap- 
ters of  Genesis.* 

It  is  the  same  with  the  control  over  other  peoples 
attributed  to  Jehovah.  It  implies  only  the  idea  that 
he  is  a  God  of  incomparable  might,  that  no  other  god 
equals  him  in  power.  This  is  the  way  in  which  the 
old  song,  Ex.  XV.,  views  the  subject.  It  sings  the 
might  of  Jehovah,  who  manifests  himself  in  the  anni- 
hilation of  the  Egyptian  army,  and  the  deliverance  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  but  without  rising  above  the  idea 
expressed  in  the  sentence :  "  Who  is  like  thee  among 
the  gods,  O  Jehovah?"^  It  must,  moreover,  be  ob- 
served that  when  Jehovah  executes  his  decrees  upon 
other  nations,    it  is   generally  in    favor  of  Israel;    so 

1  Gen.  xii.  17  ;  xviii.  f.  ;  xx.  1  ff. ;  Ex.  xv.  ;  vii.  14  ff.  ;  etc. 

2  Num.  X.  22  ;  xxvii.  16.  ^  See  Gen.  xiv.  19,  22. 
*  Studien,  I.  pp.  163  f.  ;  [Schultz,  I.  pp.  182  ff.]. 

^  V.  11  ;  comp.  Deut.  xxxiii.  26  f. 


94  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

that,  even  in  this  respect  he  appears  simply  as  the 
national  God,  as  the  Gocl  of  his  chosen  people.^ 

What  allows  us,  however,  to  suppose  that  even  be- 
fore Hosea  certain  minds  in  Israel  had  already  attained 
to  pure  monotheism,  is  that,  in  the  song  found  Deut. 
xxxii.,  which  probably  belongs  to  an  earlier  day,  idols 
are  treated  as  not-gods  and  vanities,^  and  Jehovah 
alone  is  declared  God.-^  In  other  passages,  which  are 
of  at  least  as  early  a  date  as  document  A,  we  find  this 
same  declaration,  that  besides  Jehovah  there  is  no  God.* 
Baudissin  seeks  to  restrict  the  force  of  some  of  these 
passages,^  but  he  seems  to  us  to  be  wrong. 

If  we  turn  to  the  early  prophetical  books,  we  find  in 
Amos  the  assertion  that  the  foreign  gods  are  simply 
lies.^  Baudissin,  it  is  true,  thinks  that  this  designa- 
tion, as  used  by  the  prophet,  does  not  imply  that  the 
idols  have  no  reality,  but  that  they  are  not  able  to  ren- 
der their  worshippers  the  help  desired,  and  that  they 
disappoint  the  expectation  placed  in  them.'^  In  the 
same  prophecy  Jehovah  is  also  represented  as  the  creator 
of  all  that  exists,^  and  the  judge  of  other  nations  as  well 
as  of  Judah  and  Israel.^  But,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  this  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  Jehovah  is  the 
only  God. 

Hosea  calls  the  calf  of  Samaria  a  not-god,  that  has 
been  fashioned  by  a  workman. ^'^  He  says  of  idols :  "  They 
are  all  the  work  of  artisans, "^^  and  elsewhere:  "We 

1  Comp.  Baudissin,  StucUen,  I.  pp.  158  ff. ;  [Schultz,  I.  pp.  181  f .]. 

2  vv.  17,  21.  3  ^,.  39. 

4  1  Sam.  ii.  2  ;  2  Sam.  vii.  22  ;  xxii.  32  ;  comp.  Ps.  xviii.  31. 

5  Studien,  I.  pp.  72,  101.  «  ii.  4. 

■^  Studien,  I.  p.  100.  »  iv.  13  ;  v.  8  ;  ix.  6.  »  i.  f . ;  ix.  5  ff. 

10  viii.  5  f . ;  comp.  v.  4.        "  xiii.  2. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  8.    UNITY  AND  SPIRITUALITY.       95 

will  no  longer  say  to  the  work  of  our  hands :  Our  God !  "  ^ 
or:  "The  people  consult  their  stock. "^  He  says,  ad- 
dressing Israel  in  the  name  of  Jehovah:  "Thou  knowest 
no  God  but  me,  and  there  is  no  saviour  besides  me."^ 

Isaiah  and  the  contemporary  prophets  also  represent 
idols  as  the  work  of  men's  hands.*  In  their  writings 
Jehovah  appears  as  the  lord  of  all  peoples,  and  the 
governor  of  the  entire  world, ^  as  the  one  who  will 
sometime  be  worshipped  by  all  nations.^  Isaiah  calls 
idols  simply  elilim,  things  of  nought.'' 

But  according  to  Baudissin,  this  does  not  prove  that, 
for  the  prophets,  these  deities  have  no  existence ;  they 
teach  but  one  thing,  i.e.  that,  for  Israel,  idols  are  inani- 
mate images,  that  can  give  the  people  of  Jehovah  no  aid; 
when  they  declare  that  all  peoples  will  turn  to  the  God 
of  Israel,  they  mean  simply  that  the  gentiles  will  aban- 
don the  worship  of  their  own  gods  to  worship  Jehovah 
because  he  is  a  greater  God;  the  promises  in  question 
do  not  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  these  gods  do  not  exist; 
Jeremiah  and  Deuteronomy  are  the  first  to  teach  posi- 
tively that,  besides  Jehovah,  there  is  no  God.^ 

We  cheerfully  admit  that  from  the  time  of  Jeremiah 
the  absolute  nothingness  of  all  gods  besides  Jehovah 
was  better  understood  and  the  unity  of  God  asserted 
more  categorically  in  Israel,^  while  more  stress  was  laid 

1  xiv.  3.  2  iv.  12.  3  xiii.  4. 

*  Isa.  ii.  8  ;  xvii.  8  ;  xxxi.  7  ;  Mic.  v.  13. 

5  Isa.  X.  5  ff.  ;  xv.  ff. ;  Mic.  iv.  II  ff. ;  Zech.  ix.  1  ff. 

6  Mic.  iv.  1  ff. ;  Isa.  ii.  2-4 ;  xviii.  7  ;  xix.  18-25. 

7  ii.  8,  18,  20 ;  x.  10  f.  ;  xix.  I,  3;  xxxi.  7. 

8  Studien,  I.  pp.  109,  166  ff.  ;  [Montefiore,  Lectures,  pp.  214  ff.]. 

"  Deut.  iv.  35,  39  ;  vi.  4  ;  Isa.  xliii.  10-12  ;  xliv.  6,  8 ;  xlv.  5  f.,  14, 
18,  21  f.  ;  xlvi.  9. 


96       THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

upon  the  nothingness  of  idols. ^  But  we  are  inclined 
to  think  that  even  before  that,  from  the  time  of  Amos 
and  Hosea,  perhaps  an  earlier  date,  as  seems  to  be 
taught  by  some  passages  of  document  A  and  the  books 
of  Samuel,  certain  minds  had  risen  to  the  idea  that 
Jehovah  alone  is  truly  God.  We  will  admit  that  this 
idea  found  expression  only  at  intervals,  and  at  first 
waked  but  a  faint  echo  in  Israel ;  that  the  early  prophets 
considered  first  of  all  the  relations  existing  between 
Jehovah  and  Israel  and  sought  to  impress  upon  Israel 
the  duty  of  serving  only  Jehovah.  But  we  have  the 
conviction  that  for  Isaiah,  who  repeatedly  declares  that 
idols  are  only  things  of  naught,  for  Hosea,  who  reiter- 
ates the  statement  that  they  are  only  wood,  and  human 
productions,  and  for  still  others,  their  contemporaries, 
idols  had  absolutely  no  reality. ^ 

II.    Spirituality  of  God. 

We  have  seen  that  the  ancient  Israelites  pictured 
God  to  themselves  in  the  form  of  man.  Even  the  doc- 
uments of  our  period  swarm  with  the  boldest  anthropo- 
morphisms. It  is  therefore  superfluous  to  ask  if  the 
people  Israel  conceived  of  their  God  as  a  personal  God. 
There  is  no  possibility  of  doubt  on  this  point.  We 
must  rather  ask  if  God  was  not  conceived  as  too  per- 
sonal, too  human ;  if  his  personality  is  not  asserted  at 
the  expense  of  his  spirituality.     This  is  certainly  the 

1  Deut.  iv.  28  ;  Jer.  ii.  11,  27  f . ;  iii.  9  ;  v.  7  ;  viii.  19  ;  x.  1-16  ;  xvi. 
18-20  ;  xviii.  15  ;  Hab.  ii.  18  f.  ;  Isa.  xl.  18-20  ;  xli.  7,  21-24,  29  ;  xliv. 
9-20 ;  xlix.  1-7. 

2  [Kuenen,  Beligion  of  Israel,  I.  pp.  45  ff.] 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  8.   UNITY  AND  SPIRITUALITY.      97 

case  in  earlier  times,  and  to  some  extent  even  in  our 
period.  But  there  is  the  less  reason  for  wondering 
at  these  imperfections,  as  even  now  Christian  people, 
wherever  they  have  received  but  scant  culture,  cherish 
analogous  ideas. 

Yet,  on  this  subject  also,  the  prophets,  freeing  them- 
selves from  the  gross  ideas  of  early  times,  rose  to  purer 
conceptions.  It  is  only  necessary  to  recall  the  follow- 
ing statements :  Jehovah  is  God,  and  not  man ;  ^  he  has 
not  fleshly  eyes,  neither  sees  he  as  men  see;^  he  neither 
slumbers  nor  sleeps,^  neither  does  he  weary ;  ^  he  neither 
eats  nor  drinks ;  ^  in  fine,  he  cannot  be  likened  to  any- 
thing terrestrial;^  the  heights  of  heaven  [literally,  the 
heaven  of  heavens]  would  not  hold  him.^ 

This  last  passage  is  particularly  instructive.  It 
is  taken  from  the  prayer  that  the  author  of  the  books  of 
Kings  places  in  the  mouth  of  Solomon  on  the  occasion 
of  the  dedication  of  the  temple,  which,  however,  doubt- 
less belongs  to  a  much  later  date.  It  shows  that  the 
author  had  comparatively  pure  and  lofty  conceptions  of 
God.  And  yet,  in  this  same  prayer,  the  heavens  are 
regarded  as  the  abode  of  Jehovah.^  This  latter  fact 
shows  clearly  that  even  those  who  had  risen  above  pop- 
ular and  imperfect  ideas  still  used  the  faulty  language 
of  the  people.  This,  however,  should  not  surprise  us, 
since,  to  this  day,  preachers  often  find  themselves 
obliged  to  do  thus  to  suit  themselves  to  the  capacity 
of  their  hearers. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  must  be  admitted  that  we  no- 

1  Hos.  xi.  9.  2  Job.  X.  4.  3  Ps.  xii.  1,  4.  ^  iga.  xl.  28. 

5  Ps.  1.  13.  6  isa.  xl.  18.         7  1  Kings  viii.  27. 

8  1  Kings  viii.  30,  32,  34,  36,  etc. 


98  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

where,  in  the  Old  Testament,  find  the  statement  that 
God  is  a  pure  spirit.  Schultz,  following  de  Wette, 
asserts,  and  justly,  that  even  in  the  writings  of  the 
prophets,  the  spirituality  of  God  is  conceived,  not  in 
a  metaphysical,  but  in  an  anthropological  and  popular 
fashion ;  that,  according  to  them,  God  is  spiritual  as  is 
the  human  intellect,  in  contrast  with  that  which  is  sen- 
sual ;  that  the  most  explicit  statement  on  this  subject  is 
found  in  the  following  passage  of  Isaiah:  ^  "The  Egyp- 
tian is  man  and  not  God;  his  horses  are  flesh  and  not 
spirit.  "2  He  says  further  that  it  is  not  the  spirituality 
of  God,  least  of  all  in  the  philosophical  and  absolute 
sense,  that,  under  the  old  covenant,  forms  the  founda- 
tion of  faith  in  God,  but  his  complete  and  living  per- 
sonality, conceived  in  all  simplicity  like  the  personality 
of  man ;  that  the  philosophical  idea  of  the  spirituality 
of  God  nowhere  finds  expression  in  the  Old  Testament; 
that  God  is  conceived  in  a  religious  and  not  in  a  phil- 
osophical fashion.^ 

It  is  of  course  impossible  to  conclude  from  the  pas- 
sages in  which  there  is  reference  to  the  spirit  of  God, 
that  God  is  a  pure  spirit,  since  the  spirit  of  God  was 
spoken  of  as  we  ourselves  speak  of  the  spirit  of  man. 
It  must,  as  we  have  already  said,  be  frankly  admitted 
that  the  prophets  were  not,  and  did  not  wish  to  be, 
theologians  or  philosophers,  schoolmen,  but  men  of 
action,  and  that,  in  their  works,  religious  thought  is 
very  imperfect.  It  must,  however,  also  be  admitted 
that  their  religious  life  was  strong  enough  to  bear  with- 
out disadvantage  some  purely  theoretical  imperfections. 

1  xxxi.  3.       2  ii_  pp^  112  f. ;  comp.  de  Wette,  Bihl.  Dogmatik,  §  100. 
8  II.  pp.  110  f. 


SECOND  PEHIOD.  —  §  9.   NAMES   AND  ATTRIBUTES.      99 

Though  Jewish  scholasticism  first,  and  Christian  scho- 
lasticism afterwards,  have  succeeded  in  correcting,  on 
some  points,  the  religious  thought  of  the  Hebrew 
prophets,  they  have  always  displayed  great  lack  of  the 
mighty  inspiration  from  on  high  which  was  the  chief 
strength  and  will  be  the  lasting  glory  of  these  men  of 
God. 

§  9.    NAMES  AND  ATTKIBUTES  OP  GOD. 
I.   Names  of  Crod. 

In  order  to  a  better  understanding  of  the  idea  of  God 
in  Israel,  we  must  consider  the  names  that  are  given  to 
him  in  the  documents  of  the  first  two  periods.  In  the 
Old  Testament,  names,  least  of  all  proper  names,  are 
not  arbitrary  designations;  they  denote  the  character- 
istics of  the  persons  or  things  to  which  they  are  applied. 
This  is  the  case  with  the  names  of  God;  they  tell  what 
God  is. 

1.  Jehovah. — We  begin  with  the  name  Jehovah, 
which  we  find  in  the  oldest  documents.  It  is  the  proper 
name  of  the  God  of  Israel.  Therefore  the  Old  Testa- 
ment never  gives  it  to  foreign  gods.  If  we  should  suc- 
ceed in  grasping  its  exact  signification,  we  should  know 
what  idea  the  Israelites,  from  ancient  times,  formed  of 
their  God.  Unfortunately  scholars  have  not  yet  been 
able  to  agree  on  this  subject.  We  can,  nevertheless, 
put  aside  the  numerous  explanations  that  give  to  the 
name  Jehovah  a  metaphysical  signification.  -The  Isra- 
elites gave  it  to  their  God  at  a  time  when,  far  from 
busying  themselves  with  metaphysics,  they  still  had 
very  rude  conceptions  of  the  Deity.     Two  interpreta- 


100      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

tions  only  deserve  to  be  taken  into  account:  that  pro- 
posed by  Schrader,  which  has  won  many  adherents,  and 
that  which  Dillmann,  among  others,  defends  in  a  very 
satisfactory  manner. 

The  name  Jehovah,  in  Hebrew  Yahweh,  probably 
comes  from  the  root  hayah  or  hawah^  he.  Schrader 
claims  that  it  is  a  Hiphil,  and  that  its  significance  is, 
not  he  who  is^  as  Ex.  iii.  14  would  have  it,  he  who  pos- 
sesses life,  but  he  who  provides  life,  who  is  the  author 
of  it,  who  is  the  creator.^  Let  us  first  observe  that 
Yahweh  can  be  a  Qal  as  well  as  a  Hiphil.  From  the 
grammatical  point  of  view,  therefore,  the  biblical  inter- 
pretation, "he  who  is,"  is  as  well  founded  as  that  of 
Schrader.  Besides,  we  are  inclined  to  believe  that  this 
scholar  is  not  in  the  right  because  his  explanation  is  too 
metaphysical,  and  does  not  harmonize  with  the  religious 
ideas  of  the  early  Israelites.  They  did  not  regard  Jeho- 
vah as  above  all  the  Creator,  the  author  of  all  that 
exists,  but  as  their  king  and  their  protector. 

We  find  an  interpretation  of  this  name,  Ex.  iii., 
which  belongs  to  document  A.  We  read  there  as  fol- 
lows :  When  God  wished  to  send  Moses  to  the  children 
of  Israel  to  deliver  them  from  Egyptian  servitude,  he 
said ;  "  I  will  go  then  to  the  children  of  Israel  and  say 
to  them:  The  God  of  your  fathers  sends  me  to  you. 
But  if  they  ask  me  what  his  name  is,  what  shall  I  an- 
swer them  ?  "  And  God  replied  to  him :  "  I  am  he  who 
is."  He  afterwards  commissioned  him  to  go  and  say  to 
the  children  of  Israel :  "  It  is  Ehyeh  (I  am)  who  sends 
me  to  you."  "It  is  Yahweh  (He  who  is),  the  God  of 
your  fathers,  the  God  of  Abraham,  the  God  of  Isaac, 
1  Bibel-Lexikon,  art.  Jehova  ;  [cornp.  KAT  on  Gen.  ii.  4  6]. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  9.    NAMES   AND   ATTRIBUTES.       101 

and  the  God  of  Jacob,  who  sends  me  to  you.     This  is 
my  name  forever."  ^ 

This  interpretation  of  the  name  of  Jehovah  seems  per- 
fectly correct  from  the  etymological  point  of  view.  It 
should  not  then  be  placed  on  the  same  level  with  the 
false  etymologies  that  are  found  in  large  numbers  in 
the  Old  Testament  and  even  in  document  A.^  How- 
ever, the  adoption  of  this  interpretation  does  not  enable 
one  to  grasp  the  exact  signification  of  the  term  under 
discussion.  Many  of  those  who  have  adopted  it  have 
found  in  the  name  Jehovah  only  the  assertion  of  the 
real  or  the  eternal  existence  of  God.  Hence  the  well- 
known  [French]  rendering:  VEternel.  But  the  most 
accomplished  scholars  now  reject  this  too  abstract  in- 
terpretation, and  adopt  another  and  simpler.  Dill- 
mann  is  of  the  number.  He  points  out  that  the  passage 
Ex.  iii.,  lays  stress  on  the  fact  that  Jehovah  is  the  Goc 
of  the  fathers,  and  that  in  this  respect  he  remained  for 
the  people  what  he  was  for  their  ancestors.  He  theiv. 
fore  concludes  that  the  name  Jehovah  must  be  a  re> 
minder  that  the  God  of  Israel  is  and  will  be  always  the 
same,  that  he  is  unchangeable,  not  in  the  metaphysical, 
but  in  the  moral  sense.  He  adds  that  several  passages  ^ 
prove  this  signification  to  have  been  accepted  in  later 
times.*  The  name  Jehovah,  then,  taken  in  the  sense 
of  moral  immutability,  would  imply  the  idea  of  the 
faithfulness  of  God,  as  has  been  perceived  by  Haver- 
nick,^  Oehler,^  and  Schultz.'^ 

1  vv.  13-15,     2  Dillmann  on  Ex.  iii.  14  f.  ;  [Delitzsch  on  Gen.  ii.  4  6]. 

3  Hos.  xii.  4-6  ;  Isa.  xxvi.  4  ;  Mai.  iii.  6. 

*  Exodus  u.  Leviticus^  p.  35. 

5  Theologie  des  A.  T.,  2  ed,,  p.  46.  o  §  39.  7  n.  p.  138. 


102      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

We  prefer  this  latter  interpretation,  because  origi- 
nally, and  ever  afterwards,  the  unchangeable  faithful- 
ness of  God  was  of  prime  importance  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  religion  of  Israel,  which  had  as  a  foundation  the 
covenant  between  the  people  and  God,  and  as  a  cap- 
stone the  most  glowing  divine  promises.  What  was  of 
most  importance  to  Israel  was  to  know  that  God  re- 
mained faithful  to  his  promises,  to  the  covenant  estab- 
lished. This  is  exceedingly  well  expressed,  Deut.  vii. 
9,  where  it  is  said  that  Jehovah  is  a  faithful  God,  who 
keeps  his  covenant  and  his  mercy.  The  early  documents 
also  very  frequently  extol  the  faithfulness  of  God,  at 
times  connecting  this  attribute  with  the  name  Jehovah. 
We  read,  Ex.  xxxiv.  5  f.,  that  Jehovah  passed  before 
Moses  and  proclaimed  his  name,  saying:  "Jehovah, 
Jehovah,  merciful  and  compassionate  God,  slow  to 
anger,  rich  in  grace  and  faithfulness ! "  In  the  old 
song,  Deut.  xxxii.,  the  sacred  poet,  after  having  invoked 
heaven  and  earth  to  hearken  to  the  solemn  words  about 
to  follow,  proceeds,  v.  3,  in  these  terms:  "I  will  pro- 
claim the  name  of  Jehovah.  Give  glory  to  our  God! 
He  is  the  rock.  .  .  .  He  is  a  faithful  God  and  without 
iniquity;  he  is  just  and  upright."  Jehovah  is  here 
called  the  rock.  This  designation  must  evidently 
denote  his  unshakable  faithfulness.  The  song  several 
times  calls  Jehovah  by  this  name.^  In  other  passages 
more  or  less  early,  Jehovah  is  called  the  rock  of  Israel, 
a  rock  for  all  times,  or,  in  parallelism,  to  express  the 
same  idea,  a  buckler,  a  fortress,  a  sure  refuge. ^     Hosea, 

1  vv.  15,  18,  30  f. 

2  Isa.  XXX.  29  ;  xxvi.  4  ;  Ps.  xviii.  2,  30  ;  xxviii.  1 ;  xxxi.  2  f.  j  xlii. 
9 ;  Ixixix.  18,  26  ;  xci.  4  ff.,  9  ff .  ;  cxliv.  1  ff. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  9.    NAMES   AND  ATTRIBUTES.       103 

addressing  Israel  in  Jehovah's  name,  says:  "I  will 
betroth  thee  to  me  in  faithfulness,  and  thou  shalt  know 
Jehovah."  1  He  calls  Jehovah  the  faithful  Holy  One.^ 
We  will  quote  one  more  early  passage  in  which  the 
unchangeableness  and  faithfulness  as  well  as  the  truth- 
fulness of  Jehovah  are  admirably  described;  "God  is 
not  man,  that  he  should  lie,  nor  a  son  of  man  that  he 
should  repent.  What  he  hath  said,  will  he  not  do? 
What  he  hath  uttered,  will  he  not  perform?  "^  Else- 
where we  find  declarations  of  the  same  sort,  expressing 
the  idea  that  Jehovah  does  not  recall  his  word,  that  he 
neither  changes  nor  repents,  that  he  keeps  his  promises 
and  fulfils  his  threats.* 

It  appears  from  all  the  above  passages,  —  and  many 
others  of  the  same  import  might  be  cited,  —  that  the 
prophets,  and  the  Israelites  generally,  far  from  engag- 
ing in  transcendental  speculations  concerning  God,  or 
approaching  the  idea  of  God  from  the  metaphysical  side, 
attached  so  much  the  more  importance  to  his  moral 
perfections,  especially  his  unchangeable  faithfulness. 

2.  Jehovah,  Crod  of  Hosts.  —  We  must,  in  the  second 
place,  consider  a  name  of  God  composed  of  Sehhaoth, 
hosts,  and  Yahiveh  or  Elohim  (God),  or  both :  Yahweh 
Sehhaoth,  Elohe  Sehhaoth,  Yahweh  Elohe  Sehhaoth.^  This 
composite  name  is  not  used  in  all  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament.      It  is  not  met  in  the  oldest  documents, 

1  ii.  20.  2  xi.  12. 

3  Num.  xxiii.  19  ;  comp.  1  Sam.  xv.  29. 

4  Isa.  xxxi.  2  ;  Ezek.  xxiv.  14  ;  xvii.  24  ;  Zech.  viii.  14  f.  ;  Mai.  iii.  6  : 
Ps.  cii.  25-27  ;  ex.  4. 

5  1  Sam.  i.  3 ;  iv.  4  ;  Amos  iii.  13  ;  iv.  13  ;  Hos.  xii.  5  ;  Zech.  ix.  15  ; 
X.  3 ;  Mic.  iv.  4  ;  Isa.  i.  9,  24 ;  v.  24  ;  Jer.  ii.  19 ;  vi.  6,  9 ;  Ps.  Ixxx. 
7,14. 


104  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

and  it  disappears  again  after  the  Exile.  It  is  found 
especially  in  the  books  oi  Samuel,  those  of  Kings,  a 
number  of  prophetical  books,  from  Amos  to  Isaiah,  and 
in  a  series  of  psalms. 

In  order  to  get  the  true  signification  of  this  name  we 
must  allow  ourselves  to  be  guided  by  the  word  Sehha- 
oth.  Now  this  plural  always  denotes  terrestrial  armies, 
more  particularly  those  of  Israel.  On  this  fact  has 
been  based  the  opinion  that  the  name  Yahveli^  or  MoJie, 
Sehhaoth  denotes  only  the  God  of  the  hosts  of  Israel.^ 
Others,  on  the  contrary,  claim  that  it  denotes  chiefly 
or  only  the  God  of  the  celestial  hosts,  the  stars  and  the 
angels.^  Havernick,  in  his  turn,  asserts  that  this  name 
takes  its  origin  from  Gen.  ii.  1,  and  that  the  term 
Sehhaoth  includes  all  the  creatures  of  God,  and  not 
merely  the  army  of  Israel  or  the  stars. ^  Still  others 
maintain  that  originally  this  name  referred  only  to  the 
hosts  of  Israel,  but  that  afterwards  it  was  applied  also 
to  the  starry  and  angelic  hosts.*  We  think  that  the 
last  come  nearest  to  the  truth. 

Even  in  the  song  of  Deborah,  as  well  as  all  the  rest 
of  the  Old  Testament,  the  wars  of  Israel  are  regarded 
as  the  wars  of  Jehovah.^     In  the   oldest   documents, 

1  Baur  on  Ps.  xxiv.  10,  in  de  Wette's  Commentary,  5  ed. ;  Schrader, 
Bihel-Lexikon,  V.  pp.  702  f.  ;  Jahrbucher  fur  prot.  TheoL,  1875,  pp. 
319  f.;  [Schultz,  II.  139f.]. 

2  Hupfeld  and  Delitzscli  on  Ps.  xxiv.  10  ;  Oehler,  §§  195  ff. ;  Reuss, 
Les  Prophetes,  I.  pp.  32  f. ;  [Cheyne  on  Isa.  i.  9]. 

3  Theologie  des  A.  T.,  pp.  48  f. 

4  De  Wette,  Archeologie,  §  97  ;  von  Colin,  Bib.  Theologie,  I.  pp. 
104  f. ;  Schultz,  II.  pp.  139  f. 

"^  Jud.  V.  23 ;  comp.  vii.  18,  20 ;  1  Sam.  xvii.  47  ;  xviii.  17 ; 
XXV.  28 ;  etc. 


SECOND   PERIOD. §  9.    NAMES   AND   ATTRIBUTES.       105 

when  Israel  is  at  war  with  another  people,  it  is  Jehovah 
who  directs  the  conflict,  and,  when  Israel  obtains  the 
victory,  it  is  Jehovah  to  whom  the  glory  redounds. ^ 
Jehovah  is  very  early  represented  as  a  warrior.  ^  A 
document  perhaps  older  than  any  that  we  now  possess 
bore  the  title :  "  Wars  of  Jehovah." ^  It  is  in  all  proba- 
bility this  mode  of  thought  that  gave  rise  to  the  name 
Yahweh  Sehhaoth.  The  hosts  of  Jehovah  were  at  first  the 
armies  of  Israel,  as  1  Sam.  xvii.  45  says  in  so  many 
words. 

It  is  possible  to  show  from  a  series  of  passages  that 
the  host  or  hosts  of  Jehovah  are  the  stars*  and  the 
angels  ^  or  even  all  creatures.^  It  must,  however,  be 
observed  that  these  passages  almost  all  belong  to  late 
documents  that  do  not  employ  the  plural  Sehhaoth ;  so 
that  the  origin  and  primitive  signification  of  this  name 
of  God  are  not  to  be  sought  in  them. 

It  is  clearly  necessary  to  suppose  a  development  and 
to  some  extent  a  transformation  of  the  original  idea  of 
this  name.  It  had  at  first  a  restricted  sense,  was  applied 
only  to  the  army  or  people  of  Israel,  Jehovah  being 
regarded  solely  as  the  national  God  of  this  people.  But, 
little  by  little,  it  acquired  a  broader,  more  general  sig- 
nification, and  finally,  when  Jehovah  was  recognized  as 
the  only  true  God  and  the  creator  of  all  things,  it  came 
to  include  all  the  works  of  creation.     It  even  became 

1  Jud.  V. ;  Ex.  XV.  ;  comp.  Ex.  xiv.  14  ;  Jud.  iv.  14 ;  2  Sam.  v.  24. 

2  Ex.  XV.  3.  3  Num.  xxi.  14. 

*  Jer.  xxxiii.  22  ;  Isa.  xl.  26  ;  xxxiv.  4 ;  Neh.  ix.  6  ;  Ps.  xxxiii.  6. 

5  Josh.  V.  14  f.  ;  comp.  Gen.  xxxii.  1  f.  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  2  ;  1  Kings 
xxii.  19  ;  2  Kings  vi.  16  f.  ;  Isa.  xxiv.  21 ;  Job  i.  6  ff. ;  ii.  1  ff. ; 
Ps.  Ixxxix.  5-7  ;  cxlviii.  2. 

6  Ps.  ciii.  21  f.  :  cxlviii,  2  ff. :  Gen.  ii.  1. 


106  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

synonymous  with  almighty  creator,  supreme  ruler, 
governor  of  the  entire  world ;  for  the  Seventy  in  many 
23assages  render  it  iravTOKpdrwp.^  Though,  in  the  be- 
ginning, this  name  w^as  simply  intended  as  a  reminder 
that  Jehovah  was  the  head  of  the  army  or  of  the  people 
Israel,  that  he  directed  the  conflicts  of  Israel  and  secured 
them  victory,  afterwards,  as  we  have  just  seen,  when 
the  religious  horizon  was  broadened,  it  took  a  broader 
and  higher  signification. 

3.  The  Holy  One  of  Israel.  —  The  Old  Testament  not 
only  predicates  of  Jehovah  holiness  ;  it  also  calls  him 
the  Holy  One  or  the  Holy  One  of  Israel.  This,  again, 
is  one  of  the  names  of  God.  It  is  fitting,  therefore, 
that  we  should  speak  of  it  at  this  point. 

What  does  the  Old  Testament  mean  by  the  holiness 
of  God?  To  this  question  scholars  have  given  very 
divergent  answers. ^  Nor  is  the  etymology  decisive.^ 
It  is,  however,  certain  that  the  English  word  holy  is 
far  from  being  an  exact  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  term 
qadhosh.  We  must,  therefore,  by  a  careful  study  of 
the  original,  gain  an  exact  idea  of  the  meaning  of  holi- 
ne^'s  in  Hebrew  literature.  This  is  what  Baudissin  has 
undertaken  in  the  excellent  study  already  quoted,  which 
will  doubtless  put  an  end  to  the  arbitrary  and  erroneous 
explanations  hitherto  given  of  the  term  and  the  concep- 
tion under  discussion. 

Even  in  the  old  passage :  "  Who  is  like  thee  among 
the  gods,  O  Jehovah?     Who  is  like  thee,  glorious  in 

1  2  Sam.  V.  10  ;  vii.  8,  25,  27  ;  1  Kings  xix.  10,  14  ;  Amos  iii.  13  ; 
iv.  13  ;  etc. 

2  Baudissin,  Studien,  II.  pp.  5  ff.  ;  [Schultz,  II.  pp.  167  f.]. 

3  Baudissin,  Stitdien,  II.  pp.  19  ff. ;  [W.  K.  Smith,  Prophets, 
p.  224]. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  9.    NAMES   AND   ATTRIBUTES.       107 

holiness,  fearful  in  praise,  doing  wonders?"  ^  —  the 
holiness  of  God  denotes  his  majesty,  his  greatness,  his 
exaltation,  his  matchlessness.  Another  old  song  calls 
God  holy,  thereby  meaning  that  he  is  incomparable  and 
infinitely  exalted.^  It  even  seems  as  if  this  epithet, 
placed  at  the  beginning  of  the  song,  must  sum  up  all 
the  other  perfections  of  God  that  are  celebrated  in  it, 
denoting  chiefly  his  supreme  power. ^  In  the  prophecy 
of  Hosea,  Jehovah  says :  "  I  am  God,  and  not  a  man ;  I 
am  the  Holy  One  in  the  midst  of  thee."  *  He  reproaches 
Judah  with  their  inconstancy  toward  God,  the  faithful 
Holy  One.^  It  is  evident  that  here  the  terms  God  and 
Holy  One  are  synonymous.  It  is  well  known  that,  in 
first  and  second  Isaiah,  Jehovah  is  very  often  called  the 
Holy  One  of  Israel,  or  simply  the  Holy  One,  i.e.  the 
God  of  Israel  or  the  true  God.^  It  is  the  same  else- 
where.'^ According  to  Ezekiel  God  makes  himself 
known  as  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  the  mighty  and 
true  God,  by  sanctifying  himself  or  manifesting  his 
holiness.^  It  is,  moreover,  to  be  observed  that  God 
swears  by  his  holiness^  as  he  swears  by  himself. ^*^ 

Holiness  then  seems  to  be  synonymous  with  divinity. 
Baudissin,  in  fact,  justly  maintains  that  the   Hebrew 

1  Ex.  XV.  11.  2  1  Sam.  ii.  2. 

3  Comp.  Isa.  xl.  25  ff.  ;  Ps.  Ixxvii.  13  ff. 

4  xi.  9.  ^  xi.  12. 

6  Isa.  i.  4 ;  v.  19,  24,  etc. ;  xl.  25  ;  xli.  14,  16,  20,  etc. 

7  Hos.  xi.  12  ;  Job  vi.  10 ;  Hab.  i.  12  ;   iii.  3  ;   Jer.  1.   29 ;    li.  5 ; 
Ezek.  xxxix.  7  ;  Ps.  Ixxi.  22  ;  Ixxviii.  41  ;  Ixxxix.  18. 

8  XX.  41  f.  ;  xxviii.  22  ;  xxxvi.  23  ;  xxxviil.  16,  23  ;  xxxix.  7  ;  comp. 
Baudissin,  Studien,  II.  pp.  80  ff. 

9  Amos  iv.  2  ;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  35 ;  Ix.  6. 

10  Gen.  xxii.  16  ;  Ex.  xxxii.  13  j  Amos  vi.  8  ;  Jer.  xxii.  5  ;  xlix.  13  ; 
11.  14  ;  Isa,  xlv.  23. 


108  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

said  holy  where  we  say  divine  or  heavenly.^  Conse- 
quently holiness,  when  predicated  of  Jehovah,  denotes 
not  so  much  one  of  his  peculiar  attributes,  as  the  en- 
tirety of  his  divine  character.  We  shall  find  what  we 
have  just  asserted  confirmed  further  on,  where  we  shall 
see  that  angels  are  called  holy  ones,  and  gods  or  sons 
of  gods.  The  English  expression  that  best  expresses  the 
idea  of  holiness  in  the  sense  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
divine  exaltation  or  majesty.  It  is  only  necessary  to 
examine  the  numerous  passages  in  which,  under  various 
forms,  there  is  reference  to  the  divine  holiness,  to  be 
convinced  that  they  most  frequently  convey  the  idea  of 
divine  glory,  majesty,  exaltation,  greatness. 

Holiness  in  the  sense  of  the  English  word,  denoting 
the  opposite  of  moral  evil,  is  seldom  expressed  by  the 
word  qadhesh  and  its  derivatives,  though  it  is  attributed 
to  God  in  the  whole  Old  Testament.  It  can  be  proven 
from  every  page  that  the  God  of  Israel  hates  evil  and 
loves  only  good.  The  book  of  Job  especially  gives  a 
very  exalted  idea  of  the  holiness  of  God  thus  under- 
stood. It  says  that  God  finds  even  the  angels  guilty  of 
sin. 2  Some  portions  of  Hebrew  literature,  especially 
document  C,^  also  predicate  of  God  holiness  as  con- 
trasted with  Levitical  uncleanness.  Hence  the  numer- 
ous instances  in  which  uncleanness  of  this  sort  is  for- 
bidden in  the  Pentateuch.  On  account  of  his  holiness, 
God  is  also  exalted  above  all  that  is  profane,  resenting 
the  profanation  of  his  holy  name.* 

^    1  Pp.  79,  114  f .,  124  f .     2  iv.  18  ;  XV.  15  ;  comp.  xxv.  4-6  ;  Hab.  i.  13. 

3  Lev.  xi.  44  1;  xix.  2  ;  xx.  7,  26. 

4  Amos  ii.  7  ;  Ezek.  xx.  22,  39  ;  xxxvi.  20-23  ;  xxxix.  7,  25 ;  xliii. 
7  f. ;  Isa.  xliii.  27  f.  ;  Mai.  i.  11  f.  ;  Lev.  xx.  3 ;  xxii.  2,  32. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  9.   NAMES   AND  ATTRIBUTES.      109 

The  holiness  of  God  bears  an  intimate  relation  to  his 
jealousy,  his  wrath,  and  his  vengeance.  The  connec- 
tion between  the  holiness  of  God  and  his  jealousy  is 
indicated  even  in  document  A,  in  which  Joshua  says 
to  the  people :  "  Ye  cannot  serve  Jehovah,  for  he  is  a 
holy  God,  he  is  a  jealous  God."^  According  to  Oehler 
the  jealousy  of  God  is  nothing  but  his  holiness  active, 
breaking  forth.  ^  What  most  provokes  the  jealousy  of 
God  is  the  idolatry  of  Israel,  the  worship  paid  by  them 
to  other  gods.^  Schultz  justly  remarks  that  the  idea  of 
the  jealousy  of  God  rests  on  that  of  the  conjugal  union 
between  him  and  his  people.*  Hence  the  use  of  the 
word  adultery  to  designate  idolatry  in  Israel.  But 
God  is  also  moved  to  jealousy  for  his  people  when  he 
sees  them  in  a  condition  of  distress  or  humiliation.^ 
This  latter  sentiment,  called  jealousy  with  reference  to 
foreign  peoples  and  oppressors,  may  change  to  pity  for 
Israel.^  It  is  this  sort  of  jealousy  that  Moses  and 
Joshua  seek  to  arouse  in  God  in  order  to  placate  him 
toward  his  people  and  change  his  wrath  into  for- 
giveness.'^ 

The  wrath  of  God,  like  his  jealousy,  is  a  result,  a 
manifestation,  of  his  holiness.^  This  appears  very 
clearly,  Ezek.  xxxviii.  18-23,  where  it  is  said  that,  in 

1  Josh.  xxiv.  19.  2  §  48  ;  comp.  Schultz,  II.  pp.  175  ff. 

3  Ex.  XX.  3-5;  xxxiv.  13  f .  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  16,  21;  iv.  23  f.;  vi. 
14  f.  ;  xxix.  18-20  ;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  58.  *  n.  p.  177. 

5  Ezek.  xxxvi.  5  ;  Joel  ii.  18  ;  2  Kings  xix.  31  ;  Zech.  i.  14  ;  viii.  2. 

6  Joel  ii.  18. 

7  Ex.  xxxii.  11  ff.  ;  Num.  xiv.  13  ff. ;  Deut.  ix.  25  ff.  ;  Josh.  vii. 
7ff. 

8  Oehler,  §  48 ;  Schultz,  II.  pp.  175  f. ;  Ritschl,  Bechtfertigung  u. 
Versohnung,  II.  p.  137. 


110  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

his  jealousy  and  his  wrath,  Jehovah  will  execute  judg- 
ment upon  the  country  of  Israel,  and  thus  glorify  and 
sanctify  himself.  Deut.  xxxii.  16  and  22  ff.  show  that 
the  jealousy  aroused  in  God  by  the  idolatry  of  Israel 
afterwards  kindles  his  wrath  and  impels  him  to  punish 
the  guilty.  The  same  is  the  case  in  Deut.  vi.  15  and 
Ps.  Ixxviii.  58  f.  These  passages  show  to  some  extent 
what  idea  Israel  had  of  the  wrath  of  God.  Other  illus- 
trations, drawn  exclusively  from  early  passages,  will 
confirm  the  above  result. 

In  the  old  song,  Ex.  xv.,  the  poet,  speaking  to  Je- 
hovah, cries:  "In  the  greatness  of  thy  majesty  thou 
overthrowest  thy  adversaries ;  thou  loosest  thy  wrath ; 
it  consumeth  them  as  stubble."  ^ 

In  another  song  in  document  A,  the  poet  says  to  the 
people:  "Thou  hast  forsaken  the  Rock  that  gendered 
thee,  and  thou  hast  forgotten  the  God  that  begot  thee. 
Jehovah  saw  it,  and  he  became  angry,  indignant  at  his 
sons  and  his  daughters."  ^  The  wrath  of  God  is  kindled 
against  Moses,  when  he  hesitates  to  betake  himself  to 
Egypt  to  deliver  the  children  of  Israel.^  It  is  inflamed 
against  the  people  Israel  after  they  have  made  the 
golden  calf.^  The  wrath  of  God,  then,  breaks  forth 
whenever  his  will  encounters  opposition,  when  it  is 
ignored  or  transgressed,  and  it  manifests  itself  in  severe 
penalties.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  there  are  references 
to  the  wrath  of  God  throughout  Hebrew  literature,  and 
that  they  are  most  frequent  in  the  documents  dating 
from  the  time  when  prophetism  had  reached  its  apogee, 
Deuteronomy  and  Jeremiah.     This  proves  that  at  that 

1  V.  7.  2  Deut.  xxxii.  18  f. 

8  Ex.  iv.  14.  *  Ex.  xxxii.  10  ff. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  9.    NAMES   AND   ATTRIBUTES.       Ill 

time  God  was  still  represented  after  a  very  human 
fashion. 

The  vengeance  of  God  appears  as  a  consequence  of 
his  jealousy  and  his  anger.  This  could  not  be  better 
expressed  than  by  Nah.  i.  2:  "Jehovah  is  a  jealous 
God,  he  avengeth  himself;  Jehovah  avengeth  himself, 
he  cherisheth  malice  toward  his  enemies."  Micah, 
likewise,  makes  Jehovah  say:  "In  my  wrath  and  my 
fury  I  will  execute  vengeance  upon  the  nations  who 
have  not  hearkened."^  Similar  words  are  found,  Ezek. 
XXV.  14,  17.  Further,  in  later  as  well  as  in  earlier 
passages,  there  are  references  to  the  vengeance  of  God, 
who  sometimes  punishes  Israel  for  their  disobedience, 
and  sometimes  smites  the  foreign  peoples  who  have 
oppressed  Israel  and  are  treated  as  enemies  of  Jehovah 
himself.^ 

4.  Crod^  the  Strong  One,  the  Might?/  0?ie,  the  Most 
High,  the  Lord.  —  Having  spoken  of  the  above  names, 
which  the  Israelites  gave  only  to  their  God,  we  come 
to  a  series  of  names  of  a  more  general  character,  and, 
for  that  reason,  less  characteristic  than  the  preceding. 

The  most  general  and  indefinite  name,  and  one  that 
the  Israelites  gave  to  Jehovah  in  all  periods,  is  Elohim. 
Document  C,  and  also  one  of  the  sources  of  document 
A,  designate  God  onl}^  by  this  name  in  narrating  events 
prior  to  the  call  of  Moses.  Now  it  is  found  in  no  other 
Semitic  language;  hence  it  must  be  supposed  that  it 
is  of  Hebrew  origin.  Unfortunately  scholars  are  not 
agreed  respecting  its  etymology.      According  to   that 

1  V.  14. 

2  Deut.  xxxii.  35,  41-43  ;  Isa.  i.  24  ;  xxxv.  4  ;  xlvii.  3  ;  lix.  17  f.  ;  Ixi. 
2  ;  Ixiii.  4  ;  Jer.  v.  29  ;  xlvi.  10  ;   1.  15,  28  ;  li.  6,  11,  36  ;  Ps.  xciv.  1, 


112  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

suggested  by  Gesenius  in  his  dictionary,  it  is  from  a 
root  that  would  make  it  synonymous  with  religious 
fear,  and  this  interpretation  agrees  very  well  with  the 
old  passages.  Gen.  xxxi.  42,  53.  ^  It  has,  in  fact,  an 
indefinite  sense,  and  is  equivalent  to  the  Latin  numen 
and  the  English  divinity.'^  There  is  a  similarly  indefi- 
nite and  elastic  sense  in  which  it  may  also  be  applied 
to  man.  Thus  it  is  said  of  Moses  that  he  will  be 
Elohim  to  Aaron  and  Pharaoh.^  It  is  probably  also 
men  clothed  with  judicial  or  some  other  authorit}^  to 
whom  this  name  is  found  applied  in  the  following  pas- 
sages: Ex.  xxi.  6;  xxii.  8  f.,  28;  Jud.  v.  8;  1  Sam.  ii. 
25;  Ps.  Ixxxii.  6.^  The  king  of  Israel  is  once  called 
Elohim  ;^  Samuel  is  also  designated  by  this  word  when 
he  appears  after  death. ^  It  is  likewise  said  that  the 
house  of  David  will  be  like  Elohim."^  This  name,  then, 
denotes  a  power  or  a  being  of  a  superior  nature.^  It  is 
applied  to  heathen  divinities,  as  well  as  to  the  God 
of  Israel,  and  denotes  no  peculiar  quality  inhering  in 
this  last. 

Since  Elohim  is  a  plural,  it  has  been  claimed  that 
there  is  in  it  a  relic  and  a  proof  of  the  polytheism  of 
the  early  Hebrews.  This  thesis  has  found  numerous 
opponents.     Baudissin,  however,  defends  it,^  and  we 

1  Comp.  de  Wette,  Archeologie,  §  97 ;  Hofmann,  Schriftbeiceis, 
2  ed.  L  pp.  76  1,  79  ;  [Kuenen,  Beligion  of  Israel^  I.  p.  41]. 

2  Oehler,  §  36  ;  Hitzig,  Bihl.  TheoL,  pp.  36  f. 

3  Ex.  iv.  16 ;  vii.  1. 

4  Schultz,  II.  p.  126  ;  Dillmann  on  Ex.  xxi.  6  ;  Bertheau  on  Jud. 
V.  8.  ^  Ps.  xlv.  6  f.  ;  see  Delitzsch,  i.l. 

6  1  Sam.  xxviii.  13.  "^  Zech.  xii.  8. 

8  Comp.  Reuss,  Geschichte^  §  69. 

*  Studien,  I.  p.  55  ;  [Kuenen,  Beligion  of  Israel^  I.  p.  224]. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  9.  NAMES  AND  ATTRIBUTES.      113 

think  that  he  is  right  in  so  doing.  In  fact,  the  Bible 
furnishes  so  many  proofs  of  the  polytheism  of  the  early 
Hebrews  that  this  statement  ought  not  to  be  seriously 
disputed.  In  the  Old  Testament,  it  is  true,  this  name 
is  always  construed  as  a  singular  when  it  is  applied  to 
the  God  of  Israel;  but  this  proves  simply  that  at  the 
date  of  the  earliest  biblical  documents  faithful  Israel- 
ites were  already  imbued  with  the  principle  that  their 
people  should  have  but  one  God. 

The  names  of  God  that  remain  to  be  examined  pre- 
sent a  more^precise  idea  of  divinity  than  that  of  which 
we  have  just  spoken.  There  is  first  El^  which  means 
strong..  This  is  perhaps  the  oldest  name  of  God  among 
the  Hebrews.^  It  is  found  in  very  old  portions  of  doc- 
ument A. 2  The  passages  cited  prove  that  this  name 
was  applied  to  foreign  divinities  as  well  as  to  the  God 
of  Israel.^ 

It  is  one  of  the  old  fragments  already  cited  in  which 
we  find  the  divine  name  Shadday^"^  which  means  mighty. 
Of  this  and  the  preceding  was  formed  a  composite 
name,^  El-Shadday.,  which  is  generally  translated  al- 
mighty. It  is  rather  an  emphatic  expression  for  the  idea 
of  power. 

Another  epithet  was  very  anciently  combined  with 
El^  viz.  Elyon^  most-high ;  hence  the  composite  name, 
El-Elyon.^  Document  A  calls  God  "Most-High,  lord," 
"possessor, "or,  according  to  some  translators,  "creator, 
of  heaven  and  earth. "  ^     But  this  epithet  must  anciently 

1  Oehler,  §  36  ;  Schultz,  II.  pp.  128  f. 

2  Gen.  xlix.  25  ;  Ex.  xv.  2,  11  ;  xxxiv.  14. 

3  See  especially  Gen.  xxxiii.  20.      *  Gen.  xlix.  25.     ^  Gen.  xliii.  14. 
«  Gen.  xiv.  18-20,  22  ;  Num.  xxiv.  16  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  8. 

'  Gen.  xiv.  19,  22. 


114  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

have  served  as  a  reminder  that  the  God  of  Israel  was 
more  exalted  than  all  the  other  Elim  or  Eloliim^^  while 
the  epithet  Shadday  asserted  that  he  was  really  a  mighty 
God,  and  not  one  of  the  powerless  gods  that  the  other 
nations  worshipped. 

God  was  also  early  called  Haadhon^  the  Lord,^  or 
Adhonay^  my  Lord.^  This  name  expresses,  in  a  greater 
degree  than  those  preceding,  the  feeling  of  dependence 
in  man  over  against  God.*  It  implies  the  idea  that 
man  is  the  servant  of  God,  that  he  owes  him  obedience ; 
that  he  belongs  to  him;^  while  the  names  preceding 
imply  rather  the  idea  of  the  power  and  authority  that 
God  possesses  over  all  things. 

II.   Attributes  of  Crod. 

Since  in  Israel  the  names  of  God  were  not  arbitrary 
designations,  but  denoted  perfections  that  were  attrib- 
uted to  the  Deity,  we  have  not  been  able  to  speak  of 
them  without  at  the  same  time  mentioning  a  number  of 
attributes  of  God.  We  must  now  dwell  on  those  to 
which  hitherto  no  reference  has  been  made,  or  of  Avhich 
there  remains  something  to  be  said. 

We  have  seen  that  among  the  attributes  of  God,  those 
that  had  most  importance  for  the  Israelites  were  the 
moral  attributes.  It  will,  therefore,  be  best  to  begin 
with  them,  and  speak  of  the  metaphysical  attributes 
afterwards. 

1.  Moral  Attributes. — We  know  that  the  attribute 
par  excellence  of  Jehovah,  denoted  moreover  by  his  very 

1  Schultz,  II.  pp.  129  f.  2  Ex.  xxiii.  17  ;  xxxiv.  23. 

3  Gen.  XV.  2,  8  ;  xviii.  3,  27,  30.  *  <^ee  especially  Gen.  xviii.  27. 

^  Havemick,  Theulogie,  pp.  47  f. ;  Oeliler,  §  42  ;  Schultz,  II.  p.  129. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  9.  NAMES  AND  ATTRIBUTES.      115 

name,  is  his  immutability,  his  unshaken  faithfulness. 
Another  attribute  that  is  inseparable  from  the  faithful- 
ness of  Jehovah  is  his  truthfulness.  His  faithfulness 
being  chiefly  manifested  in  the  fulfilment  of  his  prom- 
ises, the  maintenance  of  the  covenant  made  with  Israel, 
it  can,  from  a  slightly  different  point  of  view,  be  said 
that  to  be  faithful,  for  him,  is  to  be  truthful  in  his  words, 
in  his  promises.  Thus  the  veracity  and  the  faithfulness 
of  God  are  in  a  sense  identical.  It  is  even  true  ety- 
mologically,  since  the  same  Hebrew  terms,  as  applied 
to  God,  are,  in  the  versions,  sometimes  rendered  faith- 
fulness, and  sometimes  truthfulness  or  truth. 

The  passage  already  cited.  Num.  xxv.  19,  places 
clearly  before  us  the  intimate  relation  that  exists  be- 
tween the  truthfulness  of  God  and  his  unchangeable- 
ness  or  his  faithfulness.^  Another  passage,  2  Sam.  vii. 
27-29,  shows  that  it  is  the  promises  of  God  in  which 
his  word  is  chiefly  trusted  as  a  word  of  truth.  Ps. 
Ixxxix.  only  develops  the  thought  expressed  in  the 
preceding  passage  with  reference  to  the  covenant  of 
Jehovah  with  David. ^  Thus  the  faithfulness  or  truth- 
fulness of  God  is  there  repeatedly  extolled.  ^ 

Tho,  justice  of  Jehovah,  to  which  there  is  so  frequent 
reference  in  the  Old  Testament,  is  also  found  in  the 
closest  relation  with  his  faithfulness.  The  term  justice 
in  the  Hebrew  language  is  synonymous  Avith  rectitude.^ 
We  read,  Deut.  xxxii.  4,  that  Jehovah  is  a  faithful 
God  and  without  iniquity,  that  he  is  just  and  right. 

1  Comp.  1  Sam.  xv.  29.  2  ^,^,  3  f.,  19  ff.,  26  ff.,  34  ff.,  39. 

8  vv.  1  f.,  5,  8,  14,  24,  28,  33-35,  37,  49. 

4  Oebler,  §  47  i  Diestel,  Jahrblicher  fur  deutsche  Theol,  1860, 
p.  174. 


116  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

The  prophet  Hosea  makes  Jehovah  say,  not  only  that  he 
will  betroth  himself  with  Israel  in  faithfulness,  but  also 
that  he  will  betroth  himself  with  them  in  justice  and 
equity,  or,  as  others  translate  it,  in  justice  and  recti- 
tude.^ In  Zechariah  Jehovah  declares  that,  under  the 
new  covenant,  he  will  be  the  God  of  his  people,  with 
truth  and  rectitude,  or,  according  to  other  translators, 
Avith  faithfulness  and  justice. ^  The  book  of  Nehemiah 
relates  that  the  chiefs  of  the  people  said  to  God :  "  Thou 
hast  been  just  in  all  that  has  happened  to  us,  for  thou 
hast  shown  thyself  faithful.  "^ 

Hence  we  see,  on  the  one  hand,  the  close  relation 
that  exists  between  the  faithfulness  of  God  and  his 
justice,  and  on  the  other,  that  which  exists  between  the 
idea  of  divine  justice  and  that  of  the  covenant  made 
with  Israel.  In  fact,  in  the  making  of  the  covenant, 
the  divine  justice  played  the  same  part  as  the  divine 
truthfulness  and  faithfulness.  It  was  a  guaranty  to 
Israel  that  Jehovah  was  acting  toward  them  in  upright- 
ness, that  his  words  and  his  deeds  merited  entire  confi- 
dence, that  there  was  not  mingled  with  them  the  least 
deceit. 

Though  the  divine  justice  plays  an  important  part  in 
the  covenant  made  with  Israel,  it  plays  one  more  impor- 
tant still  in  the  judgment  of  God.  It  is  chiefly  ascribed 
to  God  as  the  supreme  judge  who  renders  to  each 
according  to  his  works,  blessing  the  just  and  punishing 
the  wicked.*      Diestel,   however,   points  out  that  the 

1  Hos.  ii.  19.  2  zech.  viii.  8.  3  j^-gh.  ix.  33. 

*  Gen.  xviii.  25  ;  Isa.  v.  16  ;  Iviii.  2  ;  Zeph,  iii.  5  ;  Jer.  xi.  20 ; 
Lam.  i.  18  ;  Job  xxxiv.  10-12  ;  Ezr.  ix.  15 ;  Neh.  ix.  33  ;  Dan.  ix.  14  ; 
Ps.  vii.  8-17  ;  ix.  4  ff.,  7  ff.,  16  ff.  ;  xi.  4-7  ;  xviii.  20-30;  1.  6 ;  xcvi.  13  ; 
cxix.  75,  137  :  cxxix.  4. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  9.    NAMES  AND  ATTRIBUTES.      117 

matter  must  not  be  understood  as  if  God  were  judge  by 
virtue  of  his  justice,  this  being  the  source  of  the  judg- 
ment that  he  exercises ;  but  that  he  is  the  judge  of  the 
world  and  of  his  people,  inasmuch  as  he  is  the  almighty 
governor,  the  supreme  ruler;  that  the  divine  justice, 
being  associated  with  the  judgment  of  God,  indicates 
what  is  the  character  of  this  judgment,  i.e.  that  God 
exercises  judgment  according  to  the  rules  of  equity.^ 
He  further  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  misfor- 
tune is  never  caused  by  the  justice  of  God,  and  that 
in  the  narratives  antedating  the  Exile  there  is  no 
relation,  much  less  identity,  between  the  wrath  of  God 
and  his  justice ;  ^  that  this  identification  does  not  take 
place  until  after  the  Exile,  as  is  proven  especially  by 
2  Chron.  xii.  5-7.^  Those  who  suffer  through  the  injus- 
tice of  men  can,  on  the  contrary,  have  recourse  to  God 
for  justice,  succor,  deliverance.  The  justice  of  God, 
far  from  being  like  his  wrath  contrasted  with  his  love, 
is  often  associated  or  identified  with  it,  and  it  is  re- 
garded as  the  source  of  the  divine  blessings.*  Thus 
several  passages,  one  of  which  is  very  old,  speak  of  the 
sidheqoth^  justices  of  Jehovah ;  that  is,  the  deeds  of  jus- 
tice or  benefits  of  Jehovah.^ 

The  goodness  or  the  grace  of  Jehovah,  chesedh^  men- 
tioned as  early  as  Ex.  xv.  13,  is  frequently  placed  in 

1  Jahrbilcher,  as  above,  pp.  176  f. ;  [Schultz,  II.  p.  153]. 

2  p.  186;  [Schultz,  II.  p.  176]. 

3  pp.  192  f.  ;  [Schultz,  II.  pp.  176  f.]. 

4  Mic.  vii.  9  ;  Isa.  xxx.  18  ;  xli.  10  ;  xlii.  6,  21 ;  xlv.  13,  21 ;  xlvi.  13  ; 
li.  5  f.,  8 ;  Ivi.  1  ;  Ixi.  8  ;  Mai.  iv.  2  ;  Ps.  xxxi.  1 ;  xxxiii.  5  ;  xxxv. 
23  ff.  ;  xxxvi.  6,  10 ;  xlviii.  9  ff.  ;  li.  15  ;  ixv.  5  ;  Ixxi.  ;  etc. 

5  Jud.  V.  11  ;  1  Sam.  xii.  7 ;  Mic.  vi.  5  ;  comp.  Isa.  xlv.  24 ; 
Ps.  Ixix.  27  ;  ciii.  6. 


118      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

close  relation  with  the  preceding  attributes,  and,  in 
some  early  passages,  with  the  name  Jehovah.  Here  we 
must  again  quote  Ex.  xxxiv.  5  f. :  "Jehovah,  Jehovah, 
merciful  and  compassionate  God,  slow  to  anger,  rich  in 
grace  and  faithfulness."  In  another  passage  of  docu- 
ment A,  Ex.  xxxiii.  19,  Ave  find  a  similar  periphrase 
of  this  name  of  God ;  Jehovah  there  says  to  Moses :  "  I 
will  cause  all  my  goodness  to  pass  before  thee  and  pro- 
claim before  thee  the  name  of  Jehovah :  I  show  grace  to 
whom  I  show  grace  and  mercy  to  whom  I  show  mercy." 
The  intimate  relation  that  exists  between  the  faithful- 
ness and  the  justice  of  God,  on  the  one  hand,  and  his 
grace,  on  the  other,  appears  especially  in  another  passage 
already  cited,  Hos.  ii.  19,  where  Jehovah  declares  that 
he  will  betroth  himself  to  Israel,  not  only  in  justice  and 
faithfulness,  but  also  in  grace  and  mercy.  If  the  faith- 
fulness of  Jehovah,  by  which  the  covenant  made  with 
David  is  guaranteed,  is  highly  extolled  in  Ps.  Ixxxix., 
it  is  the  same  with  his  goodness.^ 

The  preceding  discussion  shows  that  the  grace  of 
Jehovah  plays  some  part  in  the  covenant  made  with 
Israel.  It  remains  to  be  seen  just  what  this  part  is. 
If  God  has  chosen  Israel  for  his  people,  it  is  a  simple 
favor,  an  act  of  pure  grace,  as  we  have  already  seen. 
Thus  we  read,  Deut.  vii.  9,  that  Jehovah  is  a  faithful 
God,  who  keeps  his  covenant  and  his  grace.  The  cov- 
enant and  the  grace  of  God  are  here  represented  as  one 
and  the  same  thing.  A  similar  statement  Avill  be  found 
put  into  the  mouth  of  God  with  reference  to  the  cove- 
nant made  with  David:  "I  will  keep  my  grace  for  him 
forever,  and  my  covenant  with  him  shall  be  faithful.  "^ 
1  vv.  1  f .,  14,  28,  33,  49.  2  pg.  Ixxxix.  28. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  — §  9.  NAMES  AND  ATTRIBUTES.      119 

If  God's  covenant  was  established  out  of  sheer  grace,  it 
is  also  maintained  by  grace  ;  for  Israel,  by  reason  of 
their  numerous  and  repeated  unfaithfulnesses,  no  longer 
deserve  that  this  covenant  be  maintained.  This  ex- 
plains why  Deut.  iv.  31  says  that  Jehovah  will  not  for- 
get the  covenant  confirmed  by  an  oath  to  the  fathers, 
because  he  is  merciful. 

The  love  of  God,  in  its  various  forms,  especially  as 
grace,  mercy,  and  compassion,  finds  mention  in  a  large 
number  of  passages  in  document  A,  besides  Ex.  xxxiii. 
19  and  xxxiv.  5  f.  just  quoted.  ^  It  should  be  observed 
that  even  here  the  love  of  God  is  regarded  as  much  sur- 
passing his  jealousy  and  his  anger;  though  God  pun- 
ishes the  wicked  to  the  fourth  generation,  he  shows 
mercy  to  the  thousandth,  to  those  who  love  him  and 
keep  his  commandments. ^ 

In  the  early  documents  there  is  almost  exclusive 
reference  to  the  love  of  God  for  Israel,  manifesting 
itself  in  blessings  and  deliverances  of  every  kind  granted 
this  people.  In  the  more  recent  documents,  written  at 
a  time  when  the  religious  horizon  of  Israel  had  been 
broadened,  when  catholic  ideas  and  feelings  had  more 
and  more  weakened  the  early  particularism,  there  is 
more  frequent  reference  to  the  love  of  God  for  all  peo- 
ples and  even  for  all  creatures.  What  a  difference,  for 
example,  between  the  book  of  Jonah,  which  promises 
forgiveness  to  a  heathen  nation  and  an  enemy  of  Israel, 
and  the  numerous  narratives  of  the  old  documents,  in 
which  Jehovah  commands  the  destruction  of  idolatrous 

1  Gen.  xxiv.  12,  27  ;  xxxii.  10 ;  Ex.  iii.  7  ff.  ;  xxii.  27  ;  Num.  xiv. 
18-20 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  6  ff.  ;  xxxiii.  3 ;  comp.  2  Sam.  xxiv.  14. 

2  Ex.  XX.  5  f .  ;  xxxiv.  6  f. 


120      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

peoples  without  pity  or  mercy  1  Great  progress  was, 
with  time,  made  on  this  subject  in  the  religious  concep- 
tions of  Israel.  It  is  especially  the  psalms  in  which 
there  is  reference  to  the  love  of  God  that  extends  not 
only  to  Israel  or  the  faithful,  but  to  all  creatures.  They 
say  in  so  many  words  that  the  earth  is  full  of  the  good- 
ness of  God,i  and  that  his  mercy  endures  forever. ^ 

2.  Metaphysical  Attributes.  —  In  giving  to  this  rubric 
the  above  title  we  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as 
assuming,  contrary  to  our  previous  assertions,  that 
metaphysics  was  cultivated  in  Israel.  In  distinguish- 
ing the  metaphysical  from  the  moral  attributes  of  God, 
we  simply  conform  to  modern  parlance,  make  a  distinc- 
tion unknown  to  the  Old  Testament.  We  shall  see, 
in  fact,  that  the  Israelites  never  dwelt  on  these  attri- 
butes with  a  speculative  or  metaphysical,  but  only  with 
a  religious  and  practical,  interest.  Though  since  the- 
ologians, Jewish  and  Christian,  have  believed  that  bib- 
lical truth  could  best  be  expressed  by  a  transcendental 
dogmatics,  a  speculative  metaphysics,  this  is  utterl}^ 
foreign  to  the  essentially  religious  and  practical  spirit 
of  Israelitish  prophetism,  the  principles  of  which  we 
are  now  discussing. 

The  metaphysical  attribute  that  takes  precedence  of 
all  the  others,  and  is  most  frequently  mentioned  in  the 
Old  Testament,  is  the  power  of  God.  It  is  denoted  by 
the  names  El  and  Shadday^  above  noticed,  which  we 
find  in  the  oldest  documents.  Of  old  the  Israelites 
regarded  their  God  as  a  strong  and  powerful  God,  able 
to  protect  his  people,  and  also,  in  case  of  disobedience, 
to  punish  them.     The  old  songs,   Jud.    v.,    Ex.    xv., 

1  Ps.  xxxiii.  5  ;  civ.  24  ;  cxix.  64.  2  ps_  cxxxvi.  and  elsewhere. 


SECOND  PERIOD. —§  9.  NAMES  AND  ATTRIBUTES.      121 

Deut.  xxxii.,  1  Sam.  ii.,  celebrate  chiefly  the  power  of 
Jehovah  as  it  is  manifested  in  favor  of  Israel.  The 
grand  deeds,  the  miracles,  by  which  God  delivered  the 
children  of  Israel  from  bondage  in  Egypt,  ^  reveal  his 
power. 2  It  appears  also  in  the  narratives  of  creation,^ 
the  deluge,*  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,^ 
the  victories  won  over  the  Canaanitish  peoples,^  and  in 
all  the  narratives  of  this  kind.  Except  in  Gen.  xviii. 
14,  however,  one  hardly  finds  in  the  oldest  documents 
an  assertion  of  the  absolute  power  or  the  omnipotence 
of  God.  On  the  other  hand,  nothing  indicates  that  this 
power  was  limited  as  were  the  other  attributes  of  God. 
This  attribute,  which  particularly  concerns  men,  in 
their  state  of  dependence,  the  Israelites  took  peculiar 
delight  in  asserting  and  developing  from  ancient  times. 

In  our  period  we  find  on  every  page  of  the  biblical 
books  the  assertion  that  Jehovah  has  absolute  power 
over  the  world,  that  he  can  do  what  he  will.  The  pas- 
sages of  this  sort  are  so  numerous  and  so  familiar  that 
it  is  superfluous  to  cite  any  of  them. 

A  God  so  powerful  as  that  of  Israel,  the  author  of  all 
the  wonders  of  creation  and  history  that  are  described 
in  the  Old  Testament,  would  naturally  appear  as  a  real 
and  living  God.  Passages  both  earlier  and  later,  in 
fact,  represent  him  as  such,  especially  in  formuhe "'  for 
oaths. 

One  of  the  passages  that  we  have  just  cited  says  not 

1  Ex.  vii.  ff.  2  Ex.  ix.  16  ;  iii.  19  f .  3  Qen.  i.  f. 

4  Gen.  vi.  ff.  ^  Gen.  xix.  6  josh.  i.  ff. 

7  Gen.  xvi.  13  f. ;  Num.  xiv.  21,  28  ;  Josh.  iii.  10 ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  39, 
45 ;  xvii.  26,  36 ;  etc.  ;  Hos.  i.  10 ;  iv.  15 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  40  ;  v.  26 ; 
Jer.  iv.  2  ;  V,  2  ;  x.  10  ;  etc. 


122      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

only  that  God  is  living,  but  that  he  forever  is.^  The 
earliest  passages  that  assert  the  eternity  of  God  are  Ex. 
XV.  18,  which  declares  that  Jehovah  will  reign  forever, 
and  Gen.  xxi.  33,  in  which  Jehovah  is  called  everlast- 
ing God.  It  should,  however,  be  observed  that  the 
word  olam^  which  in  these  passages  and  elsewhere  is 
rendered  everlasting^  has  a  more  restricted  significance 
than  the  English  word.  It  denotes  simply  an  unlimited 
or  very  long  time.  In  our  period,  then,  for  want  of  a 
better  term,  the  word  olam  is  still  sometimes  used  to 
denote  the  eternity  of  God  ;  '^  we  notice  serious  efforts  to 
express  this  idea  more  adequately.  Thus  they  say  that 
God  is  he  who  existed  before,  and  will  exist  after,  all 
else,  that  he  is  the  first  and  the  last,  that  his  years  have 
no  end,  and  so  forth. ^ 

The  omnipotence  of  God  implies  his  omnipresence. 
We  have  already  noticed  the  limitations  that  some  nar- 
ratives put  upon  this  attribute  of  God.  It  is,  however, 
proper  to  say  here  that,  even  in  document  A,  there  are 
narratives  that  presuppose  the  divine  omnipresence,  if 
not  in  the  strict,  dogmatic  sense,  at  least  in  the  relig- 
ious signification  of  the  word  ;  viz.  that  wherever  there 
are  believing  souls,  they  are  assured  of  the  presence  of 
God.  Thus  Eliezer  can  address  his  prayer  to  the  God 
of  Abraham  in  Mesopotamia.*  Jacob,  when  he  sets  out 
for  that  country,  receives  the  express  assurance  that 
God  will  be  with  him  and  keep  him  wherever  he  goes.^ 
And  this  promise  is  realized  in  the  subsequent  life  of 

1  Deut.  xxxii.  40. 

2  Jer.  X.  10  ;  Isa.  xl.  28 ;  Lam.  v.  19  ;  Ps.  xciii.  2. 

8  Job  xxxvi.  26  ;  Isa.  xli.  4  ;  xliii.  10  ;  xliv.  6  ;  xlviii.  12  ;  Ps.  Iv.  19  ; 
xc.  1-4  ;  cii.  24,  27  ;  comp.  Dan.  vii.  13,  22.  *  Gen.  xxiv.  12  ff. 

5  Gen.  xxviii.  15. 


SECOND  PERIOD. —  §  0.  NAMES  AND  ATTRIBUTES.      123 

the  patriarch.^  Since  document  A  teaches  that  God 
created  all  things, ^  the  idea  that  he  presides  over  every- 
thing must  be  of  early  date.  In  any  case,  beginning 
with  our  period,  the  omnipotence  of  God  was  actually 
asserted,  though  not  by  any  means  in  philosophical 
language.^  We  should  not,  then,  take  literally  all  the 
passages  that  say  that  God  dwells  in  heaven,  or  those 
that  give  us  to  understand  that  he  dwells  in  the  sanc- 
tuary, at  Jerusalem,  on  the  holy  mountain.  Though 
the  people  may  have  long  cherished  gross  ideas  on  this 
subject,  the  prophets  rose  above  these  imperfect  con- 
ceptions. Among  them  the  idea  of  the  presence  of  God 
in  the  sanctuary  harmonized  with  that  of  his  omnipres- 
ence, as  the  idea  that  God  is  the  ruler  of  all  nations 
did  with  that  of  Israel's  peculiar  relation  to  him.  From 
their  point  of  view  it  was  said  both  that  God  dwelt  in 
heaven  and  that  the  highest  heavens  could  not  contain 
him,*  that  he  dwelt  in  Zion  and  in  heaven.^ 

With  the  omnipresence  of  God  is  very  naturally  con- 
nected his  omniscience.  According  to  document  A, 
God  knew  the  fall  of  Adam  and  Eve,^  the  crime  of 
Cain,"  the  corruption  of  the  human  race  that  caused  the 
deluge,^  the  depravity  of  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah,^  the  oppression  of  the  children  of  Israel, ^^ 
etc.  This  document  everywhere  takes  for  granted  that 
prayers  when  addressed  to  God  can  be  heard  ;  that 
therefore  God  hears.     It  says  also  that  God  knows  the 

1  Gen.  xxxi.  49-54  ;  xxxii.  1  f .,  9  ff.  ;  xxxiii.  20 ;  xlvi.  4. 

2  Gen.  ii.  4  ff. 

8  Amos  ix.  2^  ;  Deut.  iv.  39  ;  Hab.  iii.  3  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  23  f. ;  Isa.  Ixvi. 
1 ;  1  Kings  viii.  27  ;  Ps.  cxxxix.  7-10  ;  comp.  Ob.  4. 

*  1  Kings  Yiii.  27  ff.  5  Ps.  xiv.  2,  7  ;  xx.  2,  6. 

6  Gen.  iii.  "'  Gen.  iv.  ^  Gen.  vi.  ff.  »  Gen.  xviil.  f. 

10  Ex.  iii. 


124  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

thoughts  of  men.^  It  attributes  to  him,  finally,  knowl- 
edge of  the  future. 2  This  we  find  especially  in  the 
documents  of  our  period :  ^  witness  the  numerous  pre- 
dictions made  by  the  prophets  in  the  name  of  God,  and 
the  frequent  assertion  that  God  knows  all  things,  even 
the  most  secret.^ 

An  attribute  of  God  that  is  not  mentioned  before  this 
period,  but  recurs  often  enough  hereafter,  along  with 
the  power  of  God  as  it  appears  in  nature,  is  his  ivisdom.^ 
The  reason  why  the  idea  of  this  attribute  was  attained 
so  late  is  easy  enough  to  understandc  It  Avas  necessary 
"  that  observation  and  reflection  should  first  give  to  man 
a  comparatively  exact  knowledge  of  nature  before  he 
could  grasp  the  order,  the  harmony,  that  reign  in  it,  and 
comprehend  that  it  all  has  one  end,  the  highest  good."^ 


§  10.    OEEATION. 

We  have  seen  that  originally  the  Israelites  saw  in 
Jehovah  little  more  than  their  king  and  their  protector ; 
that  they  only  gradually  rose  to  the  idea  that  their  God 
was  the  only  true  God,  creator  of  heaven  and  earth. 

Even  document  A  contains  a  narrative  of  creation.''' 

1  Gen.  vi.  5  ;  comp.  vii.  1  ;  1  Sam.  ii.  3 ;  xvi.  7  ;  2  Sam.  vii.  20. 

2  Gen.  xi.  3 ;  xv.  13  ff.  ;  xviii.  14,  18  ;  xxviii.  14  ;  Ex.  iv.  14  ;  xi. 
1  ff.  ;  etc.  3  isa.  xlii.  9  ;  xliii.  9-12  ;  xlvi.  10 ;  xlviii.  4  f. 

4  Amos  iv.  13  ;  v.  12  ;  Hos.  v.  3  ;  Zech.  ix.  1  ;  Job  xi.  7-9, 11 ;  xxvi. 
5  f .  ;  xxxiv.  21  f .  ;  Jer.  i.  5  ;  xi.  20 ;  xii.  3  ;  xv.  15 ;  etc.  ;  Ezek.  xi.  5  ; 
Isa.  xxxvii.  28  ;  1  Kings  viii.  39  ;  Pro  v.  v.  21 ;  xv.  3,  11  ;  etc. 

°  Jer.  X.  12  ;  li.  15  f .  ;  Isa.  xxxi.  2  ;  xL  12-14  ;  Job  ix.  4-10  ;  xii. 
13,  16 ;  xxviii.  12-27  ;  xxxviii.-xli.  ;  Prov.  iii.  19  f.  ;  viii.  22  ff.  ;  Ps. 
xix.  ;  civ.  24;  Gen.  i.  31. 

6  Haag,  Theol.  Bibl.,  p.  312.  '  Gen.  ii.  4  &-25. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  10.   CREATION.  125 

This  narrative  declares  that  Jehovah  God  made  the 
earth  and  the  heavens.^  On  the  whole  it  presents 
na'ively,  but  not  unattractively,  the  early  conceptions 
of  Israel  on  this  subject.  It  tells  us  that,  before  the 
creation  of  man,  there  were  no  plants  on  the  earth,  be- 
cause God  had  not  yet  caused  it  to  rain ;  2  that  God 
formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  earth  and  breathed  into 
his  nostrils  to  make  him  a  living  being ;  ^  that  from 
the  earth  he  also  took  the  animals.*  The  formation  of 
woman  from  a  rib  of  man  is  clearly  the  most  original 
feature  of  this  whole  fragment.^ 

Except  in  this  narrative,  and  a  few  other  passages,^ 
there  is  little  reference  to  creation  and  God  the  Creator 
in  early  Hebrew  literature.  It  is  necessary  to  come 
down  as  far  as  the  time  of  the  Exile  to  find  passages  of 
any  number  bearing  on  this  subject.'^  The  book  of  Job 
several  times  refers  to  it.^  It  is  also  mentioned  in  the 
famous  passage,  Prov.  viii.  22  ff.,  and  especially  in  a 
number  of  psalms.^  But  the  most  remarkable  passage 
relating  to  it  is  the  narrative  of  creation  in  document  C.^^ 

Upon  comparing  this  latter  narrative  with  that  of 
document  A,  it  will  easily  be  perceived  that  it  dates 
from  a  time  when  religious  thought  was  more  developed. 
God  does  not  here  act  after  the  manner  of  men,  fash- 
ioning the  clay  of  the  earth  into  man  and  animals,  get- 
ting woman  from  a  rib  of  man,  and  watering  the  earth 

1  V.  4.  2  ^.  5,  s  V.  7.  *  V.  19.  5  ^^^  21  f. 

^  Gen.  xiv.  19,  22 ;  Ex.  iv.  11 ;  Amos  iv.  13  ;  v.  8 ;  Isa.  xxix,  16. 

'  Jer.  X.  12  f.,  16  ;  xxvii.  5;  xxxi.  35 ;  xxxii.  17  ;  li.  15,  19  ;  Zech. 
xii.  1  ;  Isa.  xxxvii.  16 ;  xl.  28 ;  xlii.  5 ;  xliv.  24  ;  xlv.  9,  12,  18 ;  xlviii. 
13 ;  li.  13  ;  Ixvi.  2  ;  Jon.  i.  9. 

8  X.  8  f .  ;  xxvi.  7  ff.  ;  xxviii.  25  f.  ;  xxxvi.  3  ;  xxxviii.  4  ff. 

^  viii.  ;  xix.  1  ff.  :  xxiv.  1  f .  ;  xxxiii.  6-9  ;  etc.  10  Gen,  i. 


126      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

with  rain  to  make  the  plants  grow.  He  proceeds  as  a 
real  creator :  "  God  said :  Let  the  light  be !  And  light 
was."  This  is  also  the  case  with  the  other  acts  of  crea- 
tion, i  The  simple  creative  word  of  God  instantly  calls 
everything  into  existence.  The  sublime  beauty  of  this 
conception  has  always  been  admired.  In  addition  to 
the  word  of  God  it  is  the  spirit  of  God  that  contributes 
to  the  realization  of  the  work  of  creation. ^  Elsewhere 
the  spirit,^  the  word,*  and  the  wisdom^  of  God  are 
mentioned  as  the  agents  of  creation. 

The  question  whether  the  world  was  produced  from 
nothing  or  whether  matter  existed  from  all  eternity,  is 
not  touched,  much  less  solved,  in  the  canonical  books 
of  the  Old  Testament.  Creation  ex  nihilo  is  first  taught, 
2  Mace.  vii.  28,  and  it  is  not  absolutely  certain  that 
it  is  the  thought  of  that  passage.^  Wisdom  says  ex- 
pressly that  God  made  the  world  of  formless  matter,^ 
probably  basing  this  statement  upon  Gen.  i.  1.  The 
creation  of  matter  by  the  almighty  word  of  God, 
however,  agrees  better  with  the  character  of  Gen.  i.  than 
the  opposite  conception.^  If  the  question  concerning 
creation  ex  nihilo  had  been  put,  or  had  presented  itself, 
to  the  author  of  document  C,  he  would  certainly  have 
answered  it  in  the  affirmative,  and  what  is  true  of  him 
is  true  also  of  the  prophets  and  the  other  sacred  writers. 
There  was,  from  this  time  onward,  too  strong  a  persua- 

1  vv.  3,  6,  11,  14,  20,  24,  26.  2  ^.  2. 

3  Job  xxxiii.  4  ;  xxxiv.  14  f.  ;  Ps.  xxxiii.  6  ;  civ.  29  f.  ;  comp. 
Gen.  ii.  7. 

*  Ps.  xxxiii.  6,  9 ;  cvii.  20  ;  cxlvii.  15,  18  ;  cxlviii.  5. 

5  Job  xxviii.  23  ff.  ;  Prov.  viii.  22  ff. 

«  Grimm,  i.  I.  "^  xi.  18. 

«  Schultz,  II.  pp.  184  ff.  ;  comp.  Reuss,  Oeschichte,  p.  320. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  10.    CREATION.  127 

sion  of  the  omnipotence  of  God  to  admit  of  the  least 
limitation  to  it.^  Even  document  A  declares  that  noth- 
ing is  impossible  with  God.^  If  the  question  under 
discussion  was  not  answered  in  the  way  indicated,  it  is 
because  it  was  not  proposed.  The  prophets  generally 
said  little  about  creation.  It  is  the  present  and  the 
future  that  engage  their  attention,  not  the  past,  and 
what  interests  them  almost  exclusively  in  the  past  is 
the  history  of  their  people.  As  for  the  sages  in  Israel, 
they  gave  more  attention  to  practical  life  than  to  purely 
speculative  problems. 

In  our  day  the  attempts  have  often  been  made  to 
reconcile  the  first  biblical  account  of  creation  with  the 
dicta  of  science.  As  for  us,  we  feel  ourselves  obliged 
to  oppose  such  attempts.  All  who  make  them  are 
forced  to  wrest  the  meaning  of  the  Scriptures  or  the 
results  of  science.  Thus  they  are  obliged  to  transform 
the  six  days  of  which  the  biblical  narrative  speaks  into 
as  many  periods,  comprising  innumerable  years.  Now 
one  must  either  imperfectly  understand  the  meaning  of 
the  passage  or  have  a  defective  exegetical  conscience 
to  venture  to  defend  such  an  interpretation.  Every 
impartial  exegete  admits  that  reference  is  here  made 
merely  to  six  ordinary  days  followed  by  a  real  Israelit- 
ish  Sabbath.  The  end  of  the  narrative  ^  shows  clearly 
that,  in  this  document,  the  institution  of  the  week 
and  the  Sabbath  is  connected  with  the  work  of  creation. 
It  appears  also  from  another  passage  of  the  same  docu- 
ment.*    The  addition  to  the  decalogue,  Ex.  xx.  11,  — 

1  Comp.  Bruch,  Weisheitslehre  der  Hebrder,  p.  77  ;  [Schultz,  II.  p. 
186  f.]. 

2  Gen.  xviii.  14.  3  Qen.  ii.  2  f.  *  Ex.  xxxi.  17. 


128      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

which  forms  no  part  of  the  original  text,  as  is  proven 
by  the  parallel  text,  Deut.  v.,  — is  also  evidently  taken 
from  this  document.  In  these  passages,  copied  from 
Gen.  i.,  there  is  reference  only  to  six  ordinary  week- 
days, hence  it  may  be  concluded  that  in  this  last  there 
is  no  reference  to  anything  else.  Or  rather,  all  these 
passages,  Gen.  i.  included,  were  suggested  by  the  Isra- 
elitish  week,  which  existed  from  the  remotest  times :  a 
clear  proof  that,  in  this  narrative,  there  is  reference 
to  six  real  days.  Moreover,  the  narrative  itself  suffi- 
ciently sustains  this  interpretation  by  the  expression, 
six  times  repeated:  "And  there  was  evening,  and  there 
was  morning.  "1  We  mast  say  that  the  idea  of  seeing 
anything  but  six  ordinary  days  in  it  would  never  have 
occurred  to  any  one,  if  modern  science  had  not  demon- 
strated that  the  work  of  creation  required  for  its  accom- 
plishment a  series  of  very  long  periods.  There  are, 
moreover,  other  variations  between  the  biblical  account 
and  science. 2 

What  should  one  do  in  such  a  state  of  things  ?  We 
must  begin  by  respecting  the  exact  sense  of  the  biblical 
text,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  results  of  science  on  the 
other,  and  admit  that  the  Bible  is  not  and  does  not 
pretend  to  be  either  a  scientific  manual  or  a  system  of 
infallible  dogmas.  Its  value  is  neither  theological  nor 
scientific,  but  religious.  This  is  true  also  of  the  first 
chapter  of  Genesis.  An  account  that  says  that  God 
worked  six  days,  a|:  the  task  of  creation  and  rested  the 
seventh  like  a  laborer,  is  far  from  perfect  from  the  theo- 
logical as  well  as  for  the  scientific  point  of  view.     But 

1  Gen.  i.  5,  8,  13,  19,  23,  26. 

2  Dillmanu,  Genesis,  pp.  10  ff. ;  [Dods,  Book  of  Genesis,  pp.  3  f.]. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  11.    PROVIDENCE.  129 

this  simple  and  naive  account  has  a  real  religious  value, 
because  it  represents  to  us  the  world  as  the  work  of  an 
almighty  God,  who  has  only  to  speak  to  bring  every- 
thing into  existence.  The  religious  soul  will  always 
require  such  a  God ;  it  will .  always  thirst  for  a  living 
God.i  It  will,  therefore,  find  ample  satisfaction  in  this 
account  despite  its  dogmatic  and  scientific  imperfec- 
tions, which  shock  only  those  who  cherish  a  false  idea 
of  the  Bible. 

Most  civilized  peoples  of  antiquity  have,  among  their 
traditions,  accounts  of  creation,  and  some  of  these  ac- 
counts are  very  analogous  to  those  of  the  Bible. ^  They 
all  seem  to  rest  on  a  common  tradition.  The  biblical 
accounts,  however,  excel  the  others,  as  the  religion  of 
Israel  excels  the  other  religions  of  antiquity.  We 
therefore  fully  agree  with  the  conclusion  with  which 
Kiehm  closes  his  article  on  creation :  "  Instead  of  mak- 
ing useless  and  fruitless  efforts  to  reconcile  the  account 
of  creation  with  the  results  of  science,  it  would  be  much 
better  to  compare  carefully  all  the  cosmogonies  of 
antiquity  for  the  sake  of  placing  in  a  clear  light  the 
religious  value  of  the  biblical  account  of  creation.  "^ 

§  11.    PEOVIDENOE. 

It  is  only  necessary  to  glance  through  the  Old 
Testament  to  be  impressed  that  the  dominant  idea,  re- 
curring on  every  page,  is  that  Jehovah  directs  every- 

1  Ps.  xlii.  2  ;  Ixxxiv.  2. 

2  See  Dillmann,  Genesis,  pp.  10  f. ;  [Lenoiinant,  Beginnings  oj 
History,  pp.  47  ff.]. 

2  Handworterhuch,  p.  UIG  ;  [Docls,  Genesis,  pp.  1  f.]. 


130  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

thing  in  the  world  and  more  particularly  in  the  history 
of  his  people.  He  appears  to  the  first  men  and  to  the 
patriarchs  to  regulate  all  that  concerns  them.  He  in- 
terferes in  histofy,  to  save  his  people  from  Egyptian 
slavery,  to  lead  them  across  the  desert,  to  bring  them 
into  the  land  of  Canaan,  to  protect  them  against  their 
enemies,  to  reclaim  them  from  their  wanderings,  to 
punish  them  for  their  unfaithfulness.  He  j)laces  over 
them  Moses,  to  whom  he  speaks  continually,  revealing 
to  him,  even  to  the  least  details,  the  laws,  civil  and  re- 
ligious, that  Israel  are  to  obey.  Joshua,  who  succeeds 
Moses  by  the  express  command  of  God,  is  also  divinely 
directed  in  all  his  undertakings.  After  Joshua  there 
are  judges,  raised  up  and  directed  by  the  spirit  of  God, 
who  govern  the  various  tribes  of  Israel.  Then  the 
kings  or  anointed  ones  of  Jehovah  are  placed  over  the 
whole  people,  also  the  prophets,  those  servants  of  God 
par  excellence^  who  always  speak  and  act  under  the  influ- 
ence of  divine  inspiration.  In  a  word,  from  the  remot- 
est antiquity  the  people  Israel  felt  themselves  con- 
stantly governed  and  directed  in  all  things  by  Jehovah 
himself  or  by  powers  established  and  inspired  by  him. 
From  this  point  of  view  providence  becomes  identical 
with  the  theocratic  government  of  Israel.  For  a  long 
time,  doubtless,  the  Israelites  had  no  other  conception 
of  divine  providence. 

Afterwards,  however,  they  rose  to  the  idea  that  Jeho- 
vah directs,  as  sovereign  lord,  all  the  peoples  of  the 
earth.  1  Nevertheless,  Israel  always  remained  the  centre 
of  the  world's  history,  and  the  other  peoples  were,  in 

1  Amos  i.  2,  1  ff. ;  ix.  7  ;  Zech.  ix.  1  ff.  ;  Mic.  iv.  11  ff.  ;  Isa.  xv.  ff. ; 
Jer.  xlvi.  ff. ;  Ezek.  xxv.  ff. ;  2  Kings  v.  1 ;  Deut.  ii.  22. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  11.  PROVIDENCE.      131 

reality,  only  instruments  employed  by  Jehovah  to  exe- 
cute his  purposes  toward  his  chosen  people.  The  nar- 
row pai^ticularism,  inherent  in  the  whole  old  covenant, 
was  only  partially  outgrown  by  the  proi3hets ;  none  of 
them  rose  to  strict  universalism,  as  more  than  one  con- 
sideration will  show. 

What  idea  was  current  in  Israel  of  the  relation  ex- 
isting between  divine  providence  and  human  freedom  ? 
It  is  certain  that  the  Old  Testament  allows  great  play 
to  the  freedom  of  man.  The  legal  regime  leaves  to  each 
the  choice  between  life  and  death,  between  blessing  and 
cursing.  What  Deut.  xxx.  15-20  says  on  this  subject 
is  but  an  admirable  resume  of  the  whole  Old  Testament. 
The  efficacy  of  prayer  is  also  everywhere  recognized; 
that  is  to  say,  it  is  admitted  that  the  will  of  man  is  taken 
into  consideration  by  God,  that  it  influences  the  divine 
will.i 

Though,  on  the  one  hand,  the  Old  Testament  takes 
for  granted  or  asserts  the  reality  of  human  freedom,  on 
the  other,  it  teaches  just  as  categorically  the  absolute 
dependence  of  man  with  respect  to  God.  According 
to  this  doctrine  everything  in  the  history  of  peoples 
and  individuals  depends  upon  God  and  his  providential 
direction ;  there  is  no  place  for  chance. ^  Nothing  hap- 
pens except  the  Lord  decrees  it.-^  Even  when  the  lot  is 
cast,  the  decision  comes  from  God.^  Human  actions  are 
no  exception  to  the  general  rule.  They  also  are  abso- 
lutely dependent  upon  God.     Man  plans  his  path,  but 

1  See  especially  Gen.  xviii.  23  ff.  ;  Ex.  xxxii.  10-14 ;  Num.xiv.  12- 
20  ;  Deut.  ix.  25  ff.  ;  2  Kings  xx.  1-11. 

2  Ex.  xxi.  13.  «  Lam.  iii.  27. 
*  Prov.  xvi.  33. 


132  THEOLOGY    OF   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 

it  is  God  who  directs  his  course.^  Man  is  really  in  the 
hands  of  God  as  the  clay  is  in  the  hands  of  the  potter. ^ 
Divine  providence,  in  thus  directing  the  events  of 
history,  uses  all  human  actions  for  the  realization  of  its 
purposes.  This  appears  very  clearly  in  the  history  of 
the  patriarchs,  especially  in  that  of  Jacob,  and  most 
clearly  in  that  of  Joseph.  It  is  expressly  said  that  the 
evil  that  his  brothers  sought  to  do  to  Joseph  was  provi- 
dential, and  that  God  would  and  could  transform  it  into 
good. 2  The  same  point  of  view  is  maintained  in  the 
later  history.  The  cruel  edict  of  Pharaoh  against  the 
Hebrew  children,  the  exposure  of  Moses  on  the  Nile, 
his  education  at  the  Egyptian  court,  the  murder  that 
he  commits,  his  flight  and  his  sojourn  in  the  desert,  — • 
everything  helps  to  prepare  him  for  his  lofty  mission  as 
deliverer  of  the  children  of  Israel.  All  the  persecu- 
tions directed  against  David  only  serve  to  bring  him 
more  surely  to  the  throne.  Balaam  is  forced  to  bless 
Israel  against  his  will.  Jonah  seeks  in  vain  to  avoid 
the  mission  that  God  has  entrusted  to  him.  The 
mighty  enemies  of  Israel,  in  spite  of  their  ambition  and 
their  proud  designs,  are  only  instruments  in  the  hands 
of  God  in  fulfilling  his  will  and  his  decrees,  in  punish- 
ing or  delivering  his  people.^  God,  indeed,  is  able  to 
do  anything,  and  there  are  no  obstacles  to  his  plans. ^ 

1  Prov.  xvi.  1,  9 ;  xix.  21  ;  xx.  24 ;  xxi.  1  ;  Jer.  x.  23 ;  Isa. 
xxvi.  12. 

2  Isa.  xxix.  16  ;  xlv.  9  f.  ;  Ixiv.  8  ;  Jer.  xviii.  6. 

3  Gen.  xlv.  5,  7  f.  ;  1.  20. 

*  Ex.  ix.  15  f.  ;  xi.  9  ;  Isa.  x.  5  ff.  ;  xiv.  12  ff.  ;  xli.  2  ff.,  25  ff.  ; 
xlv.  1  ff.  ;  Jer.  1.  2  ff.,  8  ff.,  41  ff.  ;  li.  11  ff.,  20  ff.,  27  ff.  ;  Hab.  i. 
5  ff. ;  Zech.  xiv.  2. 

^  Job  xlii.  2  ;  comp.  Prov.  xxi.  ol  ;  Ps.  cxviii.  22  f. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  11.    PROVIDENCE.  133 

Thus  he  laughs  at  the  powerful  of  the  earth,  who  dare 
to  oppose  him,  him  and  his  anointed.  ^ 

It  appears  from  the  preceding  discussion,  that  God 
is  the  author  both  of  the  happiness  and  the  unhappiness 
of  peoples  and  individuals.  Such  is  the  teaching  of  the 
whole  Old  Testament,  especially  of  the  historical  and 
prophetical  books.  But  what  best  shows  how  far  the 
Old  Testament  carries  its  assertion  of  the  absolute  sov- 
ereignty of  God,  is  the  fact  that  it  represents  God  as 
the  author  of  moral  evil.  It  is  he,  in  fact,  Avho  hardens 
the  hearts  of  Pharaoh ^  and  the  Egyptians,^  of  Sihon* 
and  the  Canaanites ;  ^  it  is  he  who  excites  discord  be- 
tAveen  Abimelech  and  the  citizens  of  Shechem,^  who 
impels  the  sons  of  Eli  to  despise  the  exhortations  of 
their  father,^  who  sends  an  evil  spirit  upon  Saul,^  who 
incites  David  against  the  Israelites  and  leads  him  to 
take  a  forbidden  census;^  finally,  it  is  he  who  causes 
Rehoboam  to  deny  the  just  demands  of  the  people, ^^  who 
deceives  the  prophets  of  Israel  by  a  lying  spirit,  ^^  who 
prevents  the  people  from  seeing,  hearing,  understand- 
ing his  will,  lest  they  should  turn,i2  ^\^q  [^  ^  stumbling- 
block  and  a  snare  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  ^^  who 
puts  into  the  Egyptian  chiefs  an  erring  spirit.  ^^ 

The  absolute  dependence,  then,  of  man  as  respects 

1  Ps.  ii.  1  ff.  ;  comp.  xxxiii.  10. 

2  Ex.  iv.  21  ;  vii.  3 ;  ix.  12  ;  x.  1,  20,  27  ;  xiv.  4,  8. 

8  Ex.  xiv.  17.        4  Deut.  ii.  30.         &  Josh.  xi.  20.        e  j^d.  ix.  23. 
7  1  Sam.  ii.  25.       «  1  Sam.  xvi.  14  f . ;  xviii.  10 ;  xix.  9. 

9  2  Sam.  xxiv.  ;  comp.  1  Sam.  xxvi.  19. 

10  1  Kings  xii.  15.  n  1  Kings  xxii.  19-23. 

12  Isa.  vi.  9  f .  ;  comp.  xxix.  10-12  ;  Ixiii.  17  ;  Deut.  xxix.  4  ;  Job  xii. 
16  ;  xvii.  4.  i3  isa.  viii.  14. 

"  Isa.  xix.  13  f. ;  comp.  Job  xii.  24  f. 


134  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD   TESTA^IENT. 

God  is  asserted  in  the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as  his 
freedom  and  responsibility.  Let  no  one  try  to  recon- 
cile these  two  contradictor^^  assertions.  The  eminently 
practical  character  of  the  religion  of  Israel  made  it  pos- 
sible to  forego  a  solution,  which,  for  that  matter,  has 
never  yet  been  discovered,  and  which  evidently  tran- 
scends the  powers  of  the  human  reason.  The  moral 
consciousness  will  always  assert  human  freedom,  and 
the  religious  consciousness  the  absolute  sovereignty  of 
God.  Philosophers  and  dogmatists  may,  in  turn,  deny 
the  one  or  the  other  ;  morality  will  always  protest 
against  the  denial  of  our  freedom,  and  piety  against 
that  of  the  supreme  sovereignty  of  God,  and  they  will 
thus  vindicate  the  general  standpoint  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, which  in  the  place  of  two  negations  presents  two 
affirmations. 

As  God  orders  and  directs  absolutely  every  event  in 
history,  in  the  lives  of  peoples  and  individuals,  so  also 
he  governs  the  world  that  he  has  created,  and  all  the 
phenomena  that  appear  in  it.  Men  of  primitive  times, 
being  destitute  of  all  scientific  training,  knew  nothing 
or  next  to  nothing  of  the  laws  of  nature  that  regulate 
the  course  and  the  maintenance  of  the  world.  It  is 
late,  therefore,  before  there  appear  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment passages  in  which  these  laws  are  mentioned. ^ 
We  know  of  only  one  comparatively  early  passage  that 
speaks  of  the  regular  course  of  the  world  ;2  and  this 
makes  it  depend  directly  upon  the  will  of  God  and  not 
upon  laws  established  by  him.     Even  in  more  recent 

1  Jer.  V.  22 ;  xxxi.  35  f. ;  xxxiii.  20,  25  ;  Job  xiv.  5 ;  xxxviii.  10 ; 
Gen.  i.  11,  22,  28  f.  ;  ix.  1,  8-17  ;  Ps.  civ.  9  ;  cxMii.  6. 

2  Gen.  viii.  22. 


SECOND   PERIOD. §  11.   PROVIDENCE.  135 

documents  the  passages  that  speak  of  the  laws  of  nature 
are  rare.  The  prevailing  tendency  of  the  religion  of 
Israel,  not  only  at  the  time  when  the  laws  of  nature 
were  unknown,  but  even  afterwards,  when  they  were 
to  some  extent  recognized,  was  to  overlook  these  laws 
and  refer  everything  that  happened  to  the  immediate 
action  of  God.  To  the  Israelite  in  all  ages,  the  crea- 
ture is  absolutely  and  directly  dependent  upon  the  Crea- 
tor. The  spirit,  the  word,  and  the  wisdom  of  God,  that 
called  them  into  existence,  can  also  at  any  moment 
bring  them  to  naught ;  God  has  only  to  withdraw  his 
breath,  and  they  die ;  or  emit  it,  and  everything  is  re- 
newed, i  Before  the  breath,  the  almighty  and  creative 
spirit  of  God,  all  creatures  are  but  flesh,  i.e.  fragile 
beings.2  God  is  the  lord  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh, 
causing  life  and  death. ^ 

It  is  God  who  produces  and  regulates  all  the  phenom- 
ena of  animate  and  inanimate  nature,  who  grants  or 
denies  food  to  all  that  lives,  who  causes  plenty  or 
scarcity.*  This  side  of  divine  providence  is  very  well 
described  in  a  series  of  psalms,^  and  after  a  magnificent 
fashion  in  the  book  of  Job.^  The  book  of  Jonah  also 
makes  prominent  this  idea,  that  God  regulates  everything 

1  Gen.  vi.  3  ;  Job  xxvii.  3  ;  xxxiv.  14  f.  ;  Ps.  xxxiii.  9  ;  civ.  27-30  ; 
cxlvii.  15-18. 

2  Gen.  vi.  3,  13  ;  Isa.  xxxi.  3  ;  xl.  6-8. 

3  Num.  xvi.  22 ;  iivii.  16  ;  1  Sam.  ii.  6 ;  Isa.  xxxviii. 

*  Amos  iv.  6  ff.  ;  T.  8  f . ;  yiii.  9 ;  Hos.  ii.  21 ;  Zech.  x.  1 ;  Isa.  v. 
6 ;  xix.  5  ff.  ;  xxx.  20,  23  ff.  ;  Neh.  i.  4  ;  Jer.  iii.  3 ;  v.  42 ;  x.  13 ; 
Dent.  xi.  13  ff.  ;  xxviii.  1  ff.,  15  ff. ;  etc. 

Mxv.  9-13;  civ.  1  ff.,  13  ff.,  21,  27  ff. ;  cxxxvi.  25;  cxlv.  15  f . ; 
cxlvii.  9,  15-18. 

«  xxxvi.  27-31 ;  xxxvii.  2-13  ;  xxxviii.-xli. 


136  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

in  nature  as  he  pleases.  ^  God  can  make  barrenness  fruit- 
ful. 2  He  covers  with  the  waters  of  the  deluge  the  face 
of  the  earth ;  after  the  deluge  he  places  the  rainbow  in 
the  clouds ;  he  causes  it  to  rain  brimstone  and  fire  upon 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah;  he  sends  plagues  of  every  sort 
upon  Egypt;  he  gives  manna  and  quails  to  the  people 
Israel.  More  than  this,  God  can  transform  the  entire 
universe.^  He  has  only  to  speak  to  attain  his  pur- 
poses; for  his  word  does  not  return  to  him  without 
effect;  it  executes  his  will,  and  fulfils  his  intentions.^ 

The  best  proof  that  God  is  not  bound  by  the  laws  of 
nature,  but  can  do  whatever  he  will,  is  the  unlimited 
ability  to  perform  miracles  attributed  to  him.  On  this 
point  the  story  of  Moses,  and  that  of  Elijah  and  Elisha, 
are  especially  instructive.  The  Israelites  accepted 
without  hesitation  the  most  extraordinary  miracles. 
They  believed  that  Balaam's  ass  spoke,^  that  the  walls 
of  Jericho  fell  at  the  noise  of  the  trumpets  and  the 
shouts  of  the  people  Israel,^  that  the  sun  and  the  moon 
stood  still  at  the  command  of  Joshua,^  that  the  sun  even 
retraced  its  course  in  answer  to  the  prayer  of  Isaiah,^ 
that  Elisha  made  a  piece  of  iron  that  had  fallen  into  the 
water  float. ^  They  also  attributed  a  degree  of  miracu- 
lous power  to  the  Egyptian  magicians,  ^^  but  a  less  degree 
than  that  possessed  by  Moses. ^^  Finally,  they  thought 
that  false  prophets  possessed  the  gift  of  working 
miracles.^ 

1  i.  4  ;  ii.  1,  11  ;  iv.  6-8. 

2  Gen.  xviii.  9  ff.  ;  xvii.  17  ff.  ;  xxi.  1  f.  ;  xxv.  21 ;  xxx.  2,  8. 

8  Ps.  cii.  26.          *  Isa.  Iv.  11.  ^  Num.  xxii.  28.         ^  josh.  vl. 
7  Josh.  X.  12  f.  8  2  Kings  xx.  8-11. 

9  2  Kmgs  vi.  6.  lo  Ex.  vii.  11  f.,  22 ;  viii.  3. 
11  Ex.  viii.  14  ;  ix.  11.  12  Deut.  xiii.  2  ff. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  12.    MANIFESTATION   OF   GOD.      137 

On  the  other  hand,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the 
Israelites  saw  miracles  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature 
and  history.  The  same  term  that  denotes  wonders  of 
nature  also  denotes  miracles  properly  so  called.  ^ 

Oehler,  therefore,  could  justly  say  that,  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  Old  Testament,  "miracles  do  not 
differ  qualitatively  from  the  customary  operations  of 
God  in  nature  and  history.  "^  The  Israelite  saw  too 
clearly  everywhere  the  direct  activity  of  God  to  make 
an  essential  distinction  between  the  wonders  of  nature 
and  miracles  in  the  strict  sense  of  this  term. 


§  12.     THE  MANIFESTATION  OF  GOD  IN  THE  WORLD. 

The  God  of  Israel  is  an  absolutely  transcendent  God. 
The  Israelites  did  not  have  the  idea  of  the  immanence 
of  God.  Jehovah  hovers  over  the  earth ;  he  is  perfectly 
distinct  from  it,  therefore  he  is  essentially  holy;  holi- 
ness, when  applied  to  God,  denotes  his  exaltation,  his 
transcendence.  Hence  God  cannot  enter  into  direct 
relations  with  the  world;  he  needs  mediators.  Neither 
is  he  able  to  make  himself  known  to  men  in  his  glori- 
ous essence  and  majesty;  he  can  reveal  himself  to  them 
only  in  part. 

Though  the  possibility  and  the  reality  of  a  continued 
revelation  of  God  was  believed  in  Israel,  they  did  not 
claim  to  possess  a  perfect  and  adequate  knowledge  of 
him.  Moses  himself,  though  peculiarly  blessed  in  this 
respect,  in  that  God  shows  himself  to  him  and  speaks 

1  Comp.  Job  V.  9  f. ;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  5  ;  cvii.  8  f.,  23  f. ;  cxxxix.  13  f., 
with  Ex.  iii.  20 ;  xv.  11 ;  xxxiv.  10  ;  Josh.  iii.  5 ;  Jud.  vi.  13. 
«§64. 


138  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

to  him  more  directly  than  to  any  other  prophet,  ^  is  not 
allowed  to  see  God  face  to  face;  he  can  see  him  only 
from  behind ;  ^  in  fact,  none  among  men  can  see  the  face 
of  God  and  live.^  This  view,  which  dates  from  the 
first  period,  is  maintained  in  the  periods  following.* 
Man  could  not,  then,  fully  see,  know,  comprehend 
God.^  Even  the  God  revealed  remains  a  God  more  or 
less  hidden.^  Though  the  things  revealed  are  for  man, 
there  are  also  hidden  things  that  God  alone  knows. ''^  A 
distinction  must,  then,  be  made  between  the  unfathoma- 
ble essence  of  God  and  what  a  frail  mortal  can  know 
of  him,  between  God  in  himself  and  his  appearance  in 
the  world. 

I.    The  Glory ^  the  Name^  the  Face^  the  Malakh  of  G-od. 

1.  The  Glory  of  God.  —  What  man  may  know  of 
God  is  his  glory.  The  glory  of  God  is  precisely  the 
side  of  divinity  that  is  accessible  to  man,  that  is  re- 
vealed to  him.  It  may  justly  be  said  that  the  holiness 
of  God  is  his  glory  hidden,  and  the  glory  of  God  his 
holiness  revealed.^     It  might  also  be  said  that  the  holi- 

1  Num.  xii.  6-8  ;  Ex.  xxxiv.  28-35  ;  xxxiii.  11 ;  xxiv.  2,  12-18  ;  xix. 
20  ff. 

2  Ex.  xxxiii.  20-33. 

3  Ex.  xxxiii.  20  ;  xx.  19  ;  xix.  21-24  ;  iii.  6  ;  Jud.  vi.  22  f . ;  xiii.  22  ; 
1  Sam.  vi.  19  f.  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  6  ff. 

4  Isa.  vi.  5  ;  Deut.  iv.  33 ;  v.  23  ff. ;  xviii.  16  ;  Lev.  xvi.  2,  13  ;  comp. 
Ex.  xxviii.  35  ;  xxx.  21  ;  Num.  iv.  19  f . 

5  Isa.  xL  28  ;  Job  xlii.  1  ff.  ;  xxxviii.  f. ;  xxxvii.  15  ff.  ;  xxxvi.  26  ; 
xxvi.  14  ;  Prov.  xxx.  2-4. 

6  Isa.  xlv.  15  ;  comp.  Prov.  xxv.  2.  7  Deut.  xxix.  29. 

8  Baudissin,  Stiidien,  II.  p.  107. 


SECOND  PERIOD. — §  12.    MANIFESTATION   OF   GOD.      139 

ness  of  God  is  his  inaccessible  transcendence,  while  his 
glory  is  his  visible  manifestation  in  the  world. 

It  may  be  supposed  that  the  glory  of  God  appeared 
to  the  Israelitish  imagination  as  a  consuming  fire  and 
as  a  dazzling  light,  and  that  this  more  or  less  material 
conception  was  originally  suggested  by  the  fire  and 
the  light  of  the  tempest;  which  is  the  more  probable 
since  a  cloud  is  often  represented  as  the  vehicle  of 
God's  glory.  Further  evidence  is  found  in  numerous 
passages  taken  from  documents  of  all  periods. i  That 
God  appeared  as  a  consuming  fire  is  surely  the  reason 
why  it  was  feared  that  death  would  be  the  penalty  of 
approaching  him  or  seeing  his  face.  That  he  appeared 
as  a  dazzling  light  is  the  reason  why  no  one  dared  look 
upon  his  face,2  and  that  those  who,  like  Moses,  had 
seen  but  a  part  of  his  glory,  retained  a  reflection  of  it 
that  dazzled  other  mortals.^ 

It  is  apparent  from  a  large  number  of  the  passages 
cited  that  the  glory  of  God  is,  as  we  have  already  said, 
the  side  of  divinity  that  appears  and  manifests  itself  to 
men.  When  Moses  was  invited  by  Jehovah  to  ascend  to 
him  on  Mount  Sinai,  he  there  saw  the  glory  of  God.* 
On  another  occasion  Moses  entreated  Jehovah  that  he 
might  see  his  glory,  and  this  favor  was  granted  him.^ 
It  is  said  that  the  Israelites  saw  the  glory  of  God,  and 

1  Ex.  iii.  2  ;  xiii.  21  f .  ;  xvi.  10  ;  xix.  16  ff.  ;  xxiv.  15  ff.  ;  xl.  34  f .  ; 
Lev.  ix.  6,  23  f . ;  Num.  xvi.  42  ;  Deut.  iv.  12,  15,  24,  33,  36 ;  v.  22  ff.  \ 
ix.  3  ;  xviii.  16  ;  xxxii.  22  ;  xxxiii.  2  ;  1  Kings  viii.  10  f. ;  2  Chron.  v. 
14 ;  vii.  1-3 ;  Isa.  x.  17  ;  xxx.  27,  30,  33  ;  xxxiii.  14;  Ix.  1  f.,  19  f. ; 
Zeph.  ii.  2  ;  iii.  8 ;  Nah.  i.  6 ;  Hab.  iii.  3  f . ;  Ezek.  i.  4,  27  f . ;  viii.  1  f .  • 
X.  4  ;  xliii.  2  ;  Mai.  iii.  2  ;  Ps.  xviii.  7  ff. ;  xxi.  9 ;  1.  3  ;  Dan.  vii.  9  f . ' 

2  Ex.  xxxiii.  20-23  ;  Isa.  vi.  2  ;  1  Kings  xix.  13. 

8  Ex.  xxxiv.  29-35.  *  Ex,  xxiv.  16  f.  «  Ex.  xxxiii.  18-22. 


140      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

that  all  the  earth  is,  or  shall  be,  filled  with  it.^  All 
manifestations  of  the  divine  activity  in  history  and  in 
nature,  in  his  judgments  and  in  his  benefits,  may  be 
regarded  as  manifestations  of  his  glory. ^ 

From  Ezekiel  onward,  the  glory  of  God  is  connected 
with  the  sanctuary.  The  prophet,  having  seen  it  for 
the  first  time  at  Chebar,  resplendent  as  the  rainbow, ^ 
afterwards  saw  it  on  its  way  to  the  temple,  which  was 
filled  with  a  cloud ;  even  the  court  shone  with  the  glory 
of  Jehovah.*  When  he  had  his  vision  of  the  restored 
temple,  Ezekiel  also  saw  the  glory  of  the  God  of  Israel 
approach  from  the  east  and  enter  the  temple,  which  was 
filled  with  it,  by  the  eastern  door.^  At  the  dedication 
of  the  temple  of  Solomon  the  cloud  and  the  glory  of 
God  filled  the  structure.^  According  to  document  C, 
the  tabernacle  of  the  desert  was  hallowed  in  the  same 
way ;  ^  and  when  Aaron,  who  had  just  been  consecrated, 
offered  the  first  sacrifices,  the  glory  of  God  appeared  to 
all  the  people ;  a  fire  burst  from  the  presence  of  Jeho- 
vah and  consumed  the  burnt  offering  and  the  fat  on  the 
altar. ^  According  to  the  same  document,  the  divine 
glory  appeared  at  various  times  during  the  journey  in 
the  desert,  to  rebuke  the  murmurs  and  revolts  of  the 
people.^  It  appears  from  all  this  that  the  sanctuary  of 
Israel  was  regarded  as  the  place  where  the  glory  of 
Jehovah  dwelt.  ^^ 

1  Num.  xiv.  21  f.  ;  Isa.  vi.  3 ;  Hab.  ii.  14. 

2  Deut.  V.  24 ;  Ezek.  xxxix.  21 ;  Isa.  xxxv.  2 ;  xl.  5  ;  Ps.  xix.  1  f. ; 
Ivii.  5,  11 ;  xcvi.  3.  3  Ezek.  i.  28  ;  iii.  23.  *  Ezek.  x.  4. 

5  Ezek.  xliii.  1-5.         ^  1  Kings  viii.  10  f.  ;  2  Chron.  v.  14 ;  vii.  1-3. 
'  Ex.  xl.  34  f. ;  xxix.  43.  s  Lev.  ix.  6  ;  23  f. 

9  Ex.  xvi.  7,  10 ;  Num.  xiv.  10  ;  xvi.  19,  42. 

10  Ps.  xxvi.  8  ;  comp.  Ixiii.  7. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  12.    MANIFESTATION   OF   GOD.      141 

2.  The  Name  of  Grod.  —  The  name  of  God  is  very 
analogous  to  his  glory.  Sometimes  the  two  terms  seem 
to  be  synonymous.  Deutero-Isaiah,  for  example,  says : 
"  The  name  of  Jehovah  shall  be  feared  from  the  west, 
and  his  glory  from  the  rising  of  the  sun.''^  And  a 
psalmist  exclaims:  "The  nations  shall  fear  the  name 
of  Jehovah,  and  all  the  kings  of  the  earth  thy  glory!  "^ 
As  the  glory  of  God  is  especially  connected  with  the 
sanctuary,  so  is  his  name.^  The  name  of  God  then, 
like  his  glory,  denotes  his  peculiar  presence. 

We  find  also  in  the  mouth  of  Jehovah  these  expres- 
sions as  synonymous :  "  For  the  sake  of  my  name  "  and 
"for  my  own  sake."*  Jeremiah  says  both  that  Jehovah 
swears  by  himself,^  and  that  he  swears  by  his  name.^ 
Isaiah  makes  Jehovah  say:  "They  shall  sanctify  my 
name,  they  shall  sanctify  the  Holy  One  of  Jacob.  "^ 
According  to  deutero-Isaiah,  to  trust  in  the  name  of 
Jehovah  and  to  lean  upon  God  are  one  and  the  same 
thing.  ^  Elsewhere  Jehovah  and  his  name  are  placed  in 
parallelism  as  having  the  same  signification.^  Since 
the  name  of  God,  like  his  glory,  is  what  man  may 
know  of  the  Deity,  and  since  the  Old  Testament  speaks 
exclusively  of  God  as  revealed,  known,  the  identifica- 
tion of  Jehovah  and  his  name  is  very  natural. 

This  identification  seems  also  to  be  of  very  early  date. 
According  to  document  A,  Jehovah  says  to  Israel,  after 

1  Isa.  lix.  19  ;  comp.  xlii.  8  ;  xliii.  7.  2  pg^  cii.  16. 

3  2  Sam.  vii.  13  ;  Isa.  xviii.  7  ;  Jer.  vii.  12  ;  Deut.  xii.  5,  11 ;  xiv.  23  ; 
xvi.  6,  11  ;  1  Kings  viii.  29 ;  ix.  3  ;  2  Kings  xxi.  4,  7 ;  xxiii.  27. 

*  Isa.  xlviii.  9,  11.       ^  xxii.  5  ;  xlix.  13.        e  xliv.  26.        ^  xxix.  23. 

8  Isa.  1.  10. 

9  Isa.  lii.  6 ;  Ixiv.  1 ;  Ps.  Ixxvi.  1 ;  Ixxxvi.  12  ;  ciii.  1 ;  cxlv.  1  f .  ; 
cxlviii.  1-5. 


142  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

the  promulgation  of  the  law,  that  he  will  send  an  angel 
before  them  to  protect  them  and  bring  them  to  the  land 
of  Canaan,  and  adds  that  his  name  shall  be  in  this 
angel.i  Now  Reuss  translates  "my  name  "  here  simply 
"ma  personne."  In  fact,  the  name  of  God  is  here  God 
himself,  who  will  be  with  Israel  to  lead,  protect,  and 
bless  them.  In  other  passages  the  name  of  God  is  God 
in  his  various  manifestations,  whether  their  object  is 
to  protect  and  bless,  or  to  execute  his  wrath  and  his 
judgments. 2 

As  is  well  known,  the  prophets  often  declare  that 
they  speak  or  act  in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  which  unques- 
tionably means  that  they  speak  or  act  by  his  power  or 
authority.  In  other  passages  God  says  that  he  acts 
only  for  the  sake  of  his  name,  toward  men,  more  espe- 
cially toward  Israel,  who  are  unfaithful  and  unworthy 
of  divine  blessings;  that  he  acts,  that  he  blesses,  for 
the  sake  of  his  name,  to  prevent  it  from  being  profaned 
in  the  eyes  of  the  nations,  and  to  make  it  known,  to 
sanctify  and  glorify  it.^ 

In  view  of  all  this,  Oehler  has  justly  said:  "The 
name  of  God  is  not  a  mere  title  that  God  takes  by  virtue 
of  the  divine  relations  into  which  he  enters  with  men ; 
it  denotes  at  the  same  time  all  that  God  can  reveal 
of  himself,  and,  if  we  may  be  allowed  the  expression, 
all  that  side  of  the  Deity  that  is  turned  toward 
man."      And  again:    "The   name   of   God    is    every- 

1  Ex.  xxiii.  21. 

2  Isa.  XXX.  27  ;  xxvi.  8  ;  Jer.  x.  6  ;  Mic.  v.  4  ;  1  Kings  viii.  42  ;  Prov. 
xviii.  10 ;  Ps.  liv.  1 ;  cxliii.  11. 

3  Ezek.  XX.  9,  14,  22,  44  ;  xxxvi.  20-23  ;  Isa.  xlviii.  9  ;  1  Kings  viii. 
41-43  ;  Ps.  xxiii.  3  ;  xxv.  11 ;  xxxi.  3  ;  Ixxix.  9 ;  cvi.  8  ;  cix.  21. 


SECOND   PEKIOD. — §  12.    MANIFESTATION  OF   GOD.      143 

where  where  the  presence  of  the  living  God  is  felt  and 
experienced.  1 

3.  The  Face  of  God,  —  Another  expression  that  is 
very  analogous  to  those  preceding  is  the  "face  of  God." 
It  likewise  denotes  that  side  of  the  Deity  that  is  acces- 
sible to  men,  and  it  also  is  identified  with  God. 

Jacob,  after  having  maintained  the  mysterious  strug- 
gle with  God  reported  by  document  A,  calls  the  place 
of  this  struggle  Peni-el,  or  Face  of  God;  for,  says  he, 
I  have  seen  God  face  to  face. 2     It  is  said  likewise  that 
God  spoke  with  Moses  face  to  face.^    According  to  Ex. 
xxxiii.  14-16,  God  promises  Moses  that  his  face  shall 
attend  the  people  Israel  across  the  desert.     Moses  re- 
plies to  God:  "If  thy  face  come  not,  make  us  not  go 
up  hence.     And  how  shall   it  be  known  that  I  have 
found  favor  in  thy  eyes,  I  and  my  people  ?     Shall  it  not 
be  if  thou  come  with  us  ?  "     Moses,  then,  identifies  God 
with  his  face.     Reuss  here  renders  "  my  face  "  and  "  thy 
face,"  "mapersonne"  and  "ta  personne,"  and  Segond 
employs  simply  the  personal  pronouns  "moi-meme  "  and 
"toi-meme."     These  two  scholars  translate  in  the  same 
way  Deut.  iv.  37,  where  Moses  reminds  the  people  that 
Jehovah  brought  them  from  Egypt  by  his  face  and  by 
his  great  power.     According  to  Lam.  iv.  16,  the  face  of 
God  dispersed  the  Israelites  at  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem.     In  Ps.  xxi.   9  it  is  said  of  Jehovah  that  he 
will  make  his  enemies  like  a  glowing  furnace  on  the 
day  when  he  shows  his  face.     The  face  of  God,  then, 
like  his  name  and  his  glory,  denotes  the  presence  of 
God,   manifesting  himself   by  the   protection  that   he 
grants  or  the  punishments  that  he  sends  to  men. 
1  §  56  ;  comp.  Schultz,  II.  pp.  122  ff.      2  Gen.  xxxii.  30.      3  e^.  xxxiii.  11. 


144  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

The  analogy  between  the  face  of  God  and  the  name  of 
God  appears  also  from  Num.  vi.  25-27,  where  it  is  said 
that  in  blessing  the  people  Israel  in  the  words :  "  Jeho- 
vah make  shine"  or  "lift  his  face  upon  thee,"  —  the 
high-priest  puts  the  name  of  Jehovah  upon  them. 

On  the  contrary,  there  are  two  passages  that  declare 
that  man  is  not  able  to  see  the  face  of  God.^  This 
term,  therefore,  which  usually  denotes  the  accessible 
side  of  the  Deity,  here,  exceptionally,  denotes  the  in- 
visible side  of  God. 

4.  The  Malakh  of  God.  —  As  the  revealed  God  is 
identified  with  the  glory,  the  name,  or  the  face,  of  God, 
so  also,  in  the  case  of  the  malakh^  i.e.  according  to  the 
ordinary  translation,  the  angel  of  God,  or  of  Jehovah. 
He  is  mentioned  as  early  as  the  song  of  Deborah. ^ 

It  is  easy  to  satisfy  one's  self  that  there  exists  a  close 
analogy  between  the  angel  of  God  and  his  face.  On 
the  one  hand  it  is  said  that  the  angel  of  God  delivered 
Israel  from  Egyptian  slavery  and  accompanied  them 
across  the  desert;^  on  the  other,  that  this  was  his  face.^ 
Deutero-Isaiah  evidently  attempts  to  combine  these  two 
points  of  view  in  speaking  of  the  angel  of  the  face  of 
God  who  saved  Israel  from  all  his  afflictions.^ 

The  analogy  that  exists  between  the  angel  of  God 
and  his  face  perfectly  explains  the  identification  of  the 
angel  with  God  himself.  It  is  found  in  a  large  number 
of  passages.  The  malakh  of  Jehovah  is  mentioned  for 
the  first  time  in  the  narrative.  Gen.  xvi.  7-12,  Avhere  he 
appears  to  Hagar.     But  in  v.  13,  Hagar  calls  the  name 

1  Ex.  xxxiii.  20  and  33.  '^  Jud.  v.  23. 

*  Ex.  xiv.  19  ;  xxiii.  20-23  ;  xxxii.  34  ;  xxxiii.  2  ;  Num.  xx.  16. 

*  Ex.  xxxiii.  14  f. ;  Deut.  iv.  37.  ^  Isa.  Ixiii.  9. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  12.   MANIFESTATION   OF  GOD.      145 

of  Jehovah,  who  has  spoken  to  her,  Attah-M-ro'i,  which 
means :  Thou  art  a  God  who  sees.  There  is  here,  then, 
an  identification  of  the  angel  of  Jehovah  with  the  name 
of  Jehovah  and  with  Jehovah  himself.  God  and  his 
angel  are  further  identified  in  the  following  passages : 
Gen.  xxi.  17-19;  xxii.  11-18;  xxxi.  11-13;  xlviii. 
15  f.;  Ex.  iii.  2-6;  Jud.  ii.  1  ff . ;  vi.  11-16,  20-24; 
Zech.  xii.  8.  According  to  Ex.  xiv.  19,  the  angel  of 
God  goes  before  the  camp  of  Israel ;  according  to  vv,  24  f . 
and  xiii.  21,  it  is  Jehovah  himself.  Hosea,  alluding 
to  the  narrative  of  Genesis  that  reports  the  struggle  of 
Jacob  with  God,  says  first  that  the  patriarch  strove  with 
God,  and  then  adds  that  he  strove  with  the  angel. ^ 

There  exist,  however,  passages  where  God  and  his 
malakh  are  distinguished  the  one  from  the  other  as  if 
they  were  two  different  persons. ^  In  one  instance 
identification  and  distinction  occur  in  the  same  narra- 
tive. An  angel  of  Jehovah,  called  also  a  man  of  God, 
appears  to  the  parents  of  Samson  ;2  he  is  clearly  dis- 
tinguished from  Jehovah ;  *  and  yet,  after  his  disappear- 
ance, Manoah  says  to  his  wife :  "  We  shall  die,  for  we 
have  seen  God."  ^ 

Theologians  have  given  much  attention  to  the  ques- 
tion who  the  malakh  of  God  really  is,  but  they  have 
reached  very  divergent  conclusions.  According  to  some, 
he  is  an  angel,  but  not  always  the  same  one;  accord- 
ing to  others,  he  is  always  one  and  the  same  angel ;  some 
even  of  these  latter,  attempting  a  more  precise  identifi- 
cation, have  maintained  that  he  is  the  archangel  Michael 

1  Hos.  xii.  3  f. 

2  Gen.  xxiv.  7,  40 ;  Num.  xxii.  31  ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  16 ;  Zech.  i.  12  f. 

3  Jud.  xiii.  3,  6  ff.  *  j^^.  xiii.  8  f.,  16,  18  f .  &  Jud.  xiii.  22. 


146  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

of  the  book  of  Daniel.  Some  say  that  he  is  a  created, 
others  that  he  is  an  uncreated,  being;  many,  especially 
in  earlier  times,  have  seen  in  him  the  logos^  the  second 
person  of  the  Trinity;  others,  in  modern  times,  regard 
him,  not  as  a  personal  being  at  all,  but  simply  a  tem- 
porary appearance  of  God.  Oehler,  after  having  men- 
tioned and  rejected  all  these  various  solutions,  arrives 
at  the  conclusion  that  the  passages  in  which  there  is 
reference  to  the  angel  of  God  do  not  all  agree  with  one 
another,  and  that  from  the  standpoint  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament it  is  difficult  to  reach  an  exact  idea  who  he  is. 
He,  therefore,  has  recourse  to  the  teaching  of  the  New 
Testament  concerning  the  logos  to  find  an  answer  to 
the  question.  1 

We  think  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  go  so  far  to  find 
the  solution,  but  that  it  is  found  in  the  Old  Testament 
itself,  more  precisely  in  what  we  have  already  learned 
respecting  the  glory,  the  name,  and  the  face  of  God. 
These  three  manifestations  are  very  analogous  to  the 
angel  of  God.  This  is  what  strikes  one  everywhere, 
when  the  term  is  taken  in  its  strict  signification.  Reuss 
says  on  this  subject :  "  The  original  signification  of  the 
word,  which  is  usually  translated  angel^  is  abstract,  and 
corresponds  nearl}*  to  the  French  word  delegation.  God 
is  an  invisible,  impalpable  being,  and  if  it  pleases  him 
to  bring  himself  within  the  comprehension  of  man,  it 
is  not  his  very  essence  that  the  latter  grasps ;  it  is  a  form, 
a  sign,  an  appearance,  a  phenomenon  ;  in  fine,  some- 
thing that  might  be  said  to  be  separated  from  the  Deity 
or  delegated  by  it."^ 

i§60. 

2  On  Gen.  xvi.  7,  comp.  Dillmann  on  Ex.  iii.  2  ;  [Schultz,  II.  pp. 
221  ff.]. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  12.    MANIFESTATION   OF   GOD.      147 

As  there  exists  a  close  analogy  between  the  angel  of 
God,  on  the  one  hand,  and  his  face,  his  name,  his  glory, 
on  the  other,  it  is  natural  that  the  first  should  some- 
times be  identified  with  God  and  sometimes  distin- 
guished from  him ;  we  have  shown  that  the  same  is  the 
case  with  respect  to  the  other  three  manifestations. 
God  appears  in  the  world  under  various  forms.  They 
may  be  taken  for  God  himself,  since  man  does  not  know 
God  in  any  other  way.  But  from  a  higher  standpoint, 
a  distinction  must  be  made  between  form  and  substance, 
between  appearance  and  essence,  between  God  for  us 
and  God  in  himself,  between  the  revealed  and  the 
hidden,  the  visible  and  the  invisible  God.  The  only 
difference  between  the  angel  of  God  and  the  other  divine 
manifestations  that  have  been  mentioned  is  that  the 
angel  is  a  personal  manifestation ;  he  is  not  merely  a 
delegation,  he  becomes,  by  virtue  of  his  personal  char- 
acter, a  delegate.  But  this  is  only  a  formal  difference; 
in  substance  there  is  a  striking  analogy  among  the 
various  divine  manifestations  of  which  we  have  here 
spoken. 

II.    Cherubim  and  Seraphim. 

1.  Cherubim.  —  This  is  the  place  to  speak  of  the 
cherubim,  whose  chief  function  is  to  render  God  visible, 
and  to  symbolize  his  presence. 

We  read  in  two  parallel  passages  of  some  antiquity, 
2  Sam.  xxii.  11,  and  Ps.  xviii.  10,  that  Jehovah,  appear- 
ing in  the  midst  of  the  tempest,  was  mounted  on  a 
cherub,  that  he  flew  and  soared  on  the  wings  of  the 
wind.     Ezekiel  saw  the  glory  of  Jehovah  go  up  from 


148  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

the  cherubim  which  had  appeared  to  him  in  a  vision  ^ 
and  then  rest  again  upon  them.^ 

In  chapters  i.  and  x.  of  his  book  this  prophet  gives 
us  a  detailed  description  of  the  cherubim,  and  Riehm's 
Handtvorterhuch^  in  art.  Cherubim^  contains  a  figure 
corresponding  to  this  description.  We  leave  to  archse- 
ology  the  task  of  discussing  details,  content  to  call  at- 
tention to  the  fact  that  the  cherubim  are  composed  of 
four  living  beings,  have  a  man's,  a  lion's,  a  bull's,  and 
an  eagle's  face  apiece,  and  rest  on  a  fantastic  car,  that 
can  move  in  all  directions,  and  that  serves  as  the  throne 
of  God  and  the  vehicle  of  his  glory.  ^ 

This  chariot  without  horses  symbolizes  the  principal 
attributes  of  God.  Thus  the  human  figure  represents 
the  divine  intelligence;  the  lion's,  the  divine  power; 
the  bull's,  the  generative  or  creative  might  of  God; 
finally,  the  eagle's,  his  omniscience  or  his  providence. 
As  for  the  wheels  that  can  turn  in  all  directions,  and 
are  covered  with  eyes,^  they  represent  at  once  the  om- 
nipresence and  the  omniscience  of  God. 

The  fact  that  the  cherubim  form  the  throne  of  God, 
and  are  the  vehicle  of  his  glory  and  the  symbols  of  his 
presence,  evidently  explains  why  images  of  them  are 
found  in  the  sanctuary  where  Jehovah  was  supposed 
more  especially  to  dwell.  Two  statues  of  cherubim  ten 
cubits  in  height  were  placed  in  the  holy  of  holies  of  the 
temple  of  Solomon.^  Their  forms  were  carved  on  the 
walls  and  on  certain  sacred  utensils.^  They  were  re- 
produced  on   the   veil   that   hid   the   holy  of   holies.'' 

1  ix.  3  ;  X.  4.  2  X.  18  f. ;  xi.  22.  3  Ezek.  i.  4  ff.  ;  x.  1  ff.,  9  ff. 

4  Ezek.  i.  15  ff. ;  X.  9  ff.  ^  i  Kings  vi.  23-28. 

6  1  Kings  vi.  29-35 ;  vii.  29,  36  ;  2  Chron.  iii.  7.       '  2  Chron.  iii.  14. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  12.    MANIFESTATION    OF   GOD.      149 

According  to  document  C,  the  Mosaic  tabernacle  was 
ornamented  in  the  same  fashion. ^  Finally,  in  the  ideal 
temple  of  Ezekiel,  we  again  encounter  the  same  thing. 2 

The  figures  of  the  cherubim  in  the  temple  and  the 
tabernacle  have  only  one  face,  and  therefore  differ  from 
the  cherubim  of  Ezekiel,  which  have  four  faces;  but 
they  also  represent  the  throne  of  God,  and  symbolize 
the  presence  of  God :  in  Israel  Jehovah,  in  all  ages,  was 
imagined  as  seated  between  the  cherubim  or  enthroned 
above  them.^ 

The  cherubim,  finally,  take  the  part  of  guardians  of 
sacred  things.  In  the  sanctuary  they  cover  with 
their  wings  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  where  Jehovah  is 
more  especially  present ;  *  they  are  stationed  with  spread 
wings  at  the  entrance  of  the  holy  of  holies  where  the 
ark  is  kept.^  Thus  they  guard  the  thrice  sacred  pres- 
ence of  God,  and  in  a  sense  veil  it  that  nothing  unclean 
or  profane  may  approach  it.  We  likewise  see  cherubim 
posted  on  the  east  of  the  Garden  of  Eden,  to  guard  the 
way  to  the  tree  of  life,^  that  sinful  man  may  not  approach 
it.  They  are,  therefore,  the  guardians  of  sacred  things, 
the  protectors,  as  Ezekiel  calls  them.' 

How  did  the  Israelites  come  to  imagine  these  strange 
figures  ?  It  is  difficult  to  say.  The  etymology  of  the 
word  cherubim  is  uncertain,"  hence  it  cannot  greatly  aid 

1  Ex.  XXV.  18-20  ;  xxxvii.  7-9  ;  xxvi.  1,  31  ,  xxxvi.  8,  35. 

2  Ezek.  xli.  17  ff. 

3  1  Sam.  iv.  4  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  2  ;  2  Kings  xix.  15  ;  1  Chron.  xiii.  6  ;  Ex. 
XXV.  22;  Num.  vii.  89  ;  Ps.  Ixxx.  1  ;  xcix.  1. 

*  1  Kings  viii.  6  f . ;  1  Chron.  xxviii.  18  ;  2  Chron.  v.  7  f . ;  Ex.  xxv. 
20 ;  xxxvii.  9. 

5  1  Kings  vi.  27  ;  2  Chron.  iii.  xiii.  ;  Ex.  xxv.  20  ;  xxxvii.  9. 

6  Gen.  iii.  24.  "^  xxviii.  14,  16. 


150  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

in  elucidating  the  subject.  What  is  certain  is  that 
analogous  conceptions  exist  among  other  peoples  of  an- 
tiquity.^ It  is  probable  that  the  cherubim,  which  to 
the  imagination  of  the  Hebrews  were  real  and  living 
beings,  a  kind  of  winged  monsters,  owed  their  origin 
to  the  phenomena  of  the  tempest.  The  clouds,  some- 
times black,  sometimes  bright,  chased  by  the  wind, 
seem  to  have  given  rise  to  the  idea  that  the  divine  glory, 
majesty,  was  being  borne  by  these  clouds  as  by  winged 
beings  or  a  flying  chariot.  This  seems  clear  from  Ps. 
xviii.,  which  we  have  already  cited,  but  also  from  vari- 
ous passages  in  Ezekiel,  where  the  cherubim  are  accom- 
panied by  a  violent  wind,  thick  clouds,  great  noise, 
where  they  are  like  the  lightning,  a  flashing  fire  and  a 
brilliant  light. ^  Be  it  also  remembered,  that  according 
to  document  A,  God  appeared  to  Israel  when  the  law 
was  promulgated,  in  the  midst  of  the  noise,  the  clouds, 
and  the  fire  of  the  tempest.^  Finally,  let  it  be  remem- 
bered that  the  glory  of  God,  of  which  the  cherubim  are 
the  vehicle,  appeared  to  the  Israelites  as  a  devouring 
fire,  and  a  dazzling  light,  as  we  saw  at  the  beginning 
of  this  paragraph. 

2.  Seraphim.  —  The  seraphim  are  somewhat  like  the 
cherubim.  There  is  reference  to  them,  however,  in  but 
one  passage,  Isa.  vi.  1-7.  The  prophet  there  savs: 
"In  the  3'ear  of  King  Uzziah's  death,  I  saw  the  Lord 

1  Dillmann,  Bihel-Lexikon  ;  and  Riehm,  Handicorterhuch,  art.  Cher- 
ubim ;  [Smith,  Dictionary,  art.  Cherub ;  Lenormant,  Beginnings^  pp. 
117  ff.]. 

2  i.  4,  7,  13  f .,  24 ;  iii.  12  f.  ;  x.  2,  4-7  ;  comp.  Schultz,  IL  pp.  229  f.  ; 
Dillmann,  Bibel-Lexiko7i,  p.  509  ;  Riehm,  Handicorterbiich,  pp.  228, 
232. 

3  Ex.  xix,  9  ff.  ;  xxiv.  15  ff. ;  comp.  Dent.  iv.  11. 


SECOND  PERIOD. — §  12.   MANIFESTATION   OF   GOD.      151 

sitting  on  a  very  lofty  throne,  while  the  train  of  his 
robe  filled  the  temple.  Seraphim  hovered  above  him; 
each  of  them  had  six  wings;  with  two  of  them  they 
covered  their  faces,  with  two  they  covered  their  feet, 
and  with  two  they  flew.  They  cried  one  to  another 
and  said:  'Holy,  holy,  holy  is  Jehovah  of  hosts!  the 
whole  earth  is  full  of  his  glory.'  The  doors  were 
shaken  to  their  foundation  by  the  voice  as  it  resounded, 
and  the  house  was  filled  with  smoke.  Then  I  said: 
'Woe  is  me!  I  am  undone,  for  I  am  a  man  whose  lips 
are  unclean,  I  dwell  in  the  midst  of  a  people  whose  lips 
are  unclean,  and  my  eyes  have  seen  the  King,  Jehovah 
of  hosts.'  But  one  of  the  seraphim  flew  toward  me, 
holding  a  glowing  stone  in  his  hand,  that  he  had  taken 
with  tongs  from  the  altar.  He  touched  my  mouth  with 
it  and  said:  'This  hath  touched  thy  lips;  thy  iniquity 
is  removed  and  thy  sin  is  expiated.'  " 

What  is  the  etymology,  and  what  is  the  signification 
of  the  word  seraplmyi?  What  are  the  seraphim  them- 
selves ?  what  form  have  they,  and  what  is  their  nature  ? 
Finally,  what  are  their  functions  ?  These  are  questions 
that  have  been  variously  answered  by  various  scholars.^ 
It  must  be  admitted  that,  as  Schultz  remarks,  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  form  a  perfectly  clear  idea  of  the  seraphim  from 
the  single  passage  that  speaks  of  them.  Reuss,  after 
having  rejected  the  traditional  idea,  according  to  which 
the  seraphim  were  winged  angels,  adds:  "In  Hebrew 
saraph  is  always  a  serpent,  and  we  know  that  the  serpent 
played  a  part  in  oriental  symbolism,  as  a  representative 
of  certain  divine  attributes  (mystery,   eternity).     We 

1  Winer,  Eealworterhuch,  art.  Seraphim  ;  Schultz,  11.  pp.  237  ff . ; 
the  commentaries  ;  [Smith,  Dictionary^  art.  Seraphim^. 


152      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

find  it  used  in  figurative  representations  of  God  among 
the  Jews.^  It  is  not  here  a  question  of  simple  serpents, 
but  of  composite  forms  (like  those  of  Ezekiel's  cheru- 
bim) that  have  parts  of  serpents,  birds  (wings),  and  men 
(hands).  These  forms,  created  by  the  imagination  of 
the  author,  seem  to  us  grotesque,  because  we  are  not 
accustomed  to  symbolize  abstract  ideas  such  as  the 
divine  attributes  by  hybrid  combinations  of  animal  forms. 
These  ideas  thus  become  animate,  personal  beings, 
and  take  their  place  as  a  species  under  the  abstract 
notion  of  God."^ 

This  explanation,  simple  as  it  is,  seems  to  us  nearer 
the  truth  than  many  more  elaborate  that  have  been  pro- 
posed. It  is  evident  that  the  seraphim  are  very  analo- 
gous to  the  cherubim  of  Ezekiel.  They  both  appear  to 
the  prophets  in  visions.  Both  are  of  a  composite  nature. 
The  seraphim,  like  the  cherubim,  have  wings  with  which 
they  cover  their  bodies.^  The  latter,  after  the  fashion 
of  the  former,  cry:  "Blessed  be  the  glory  of  Jehovah 
from  the  place  of  his  abode!"*  One  of  them  brings 
glowing  coals  to  a  messenger  of  God,  that  he  may  scat- 
ter them  over  the  city  of  Jerusalem.^  Moreover,  we 
must  not  try  to  be  too  exact  or  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that 
we  are  dealing  with  a  prophetic  vision,  which,  like  so 
many  other  visions  of  the  same  kind,  is  important  only 
for  the  subjective  and  religious  ideas  that  it  expresses. 
The  above  considerations  show  that  the  cherubim  and 
seraphim  are  not  angels,  as  has  often  been  thought. 
Not  to  speak  of  other  differences,  there  is  this  entirely 

1  Num.  xxi.  2  ;  2  Kings  xviii.  4. 

2  On  Isa.  vi.  2,  comp.  Baudissin,  Studien,  I.  pp.  255  ff. 

»  Ezek.  i.  11.  *  Ezek.  iii.  12.  s  Ezek.  x.  2.  6  f. 


SECOND    PERIOD.  —  §  12.    MANIFESTATION    OF    GOD.      153 

external  distinction,  that  the  former  have  wings ;  while 
the  angels,  as  we  shall  see,  appear  throughout  the  Old 
Testament  in  the  human  form  and  without  wings,  and 
they  receive  titles  that  are  never  given  to  the  cheru- 
bim or  the  seraphim. 

III.   Angels, 

We  have  seen  that  the  malahh  of  God,  though  he  is 
generally  represented  as  a  personal  being,  is  not  a  being 
distinct  from  God,  an  angel  properly  so-called,  but  a 
simple  appearance  in  the  visible  world  of  the  invisible 
God.  The  same  may  be  the  case  every  time  there  is 
reference  to  malakliim.  This  is  what  Reuss,  for  exam- 
ple, in  part  maintains. ^  He  takes  the  malakhim  for 
veritable  angels  only  in  certain  passages,  like  Job  iv. 
18;  xxxiii.  23;  Ps.  xci.  11;  ciii.  20;  cxlviii.  2.2  Bib- 
lical angelology  cannot  then  be  based  chiefly  on  the 
passages  in  which  there  is  reference  to  malakhim. 

An  old  fragment.  Gen.  vi.  1-4,  speaks  of  sons  of  God 
who  take  for  wives  the  daughters  of  men  and  with  them 
beget  the  heroes  famous  in  antiquity.  Now  these  sons 
of  God  are  superhuman  beings,  veritable  angels. ^  The 
angels  are  often  called  sons  of  God*  and  even  Gods.^ 
An  old  passage,  Deut.  xxxiii.  2,  says  that  when  Jeho- 
vah appeared  from  Sinai  to  the  children  of  Israel,  he 
came  forth  from  the  midst  of  myriads  of  holy  ones. 
These  myriads  can  only  have  been    celestial   beings, 

1  Gesch.,  §§  260,  366.  2  Gesch.,  §§  236,  482. 

3  See  Reuss  and  Dillmann,  [Delitzsch],  i.l.;  Budde,  Biblische 
Urgesch.,  p.  3  ;  [Lenormant,  Beginnings,  pp.  295  ff.]. 

*  Job  i.  6  ;  ii.  1 ;  xxxviii.  7  ;  Ps.  xxix.  1 ;  Ixxxix.  6 ;  Dan.  iii.  25. 
5  Ps.  viii.  5  :  Ixxxii.  1. 


154      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

angels.  Still  elsewhere,  the  angels  are  called  holy 
ones.^  These  various  titles  that  are  given  to  them  in- 
dicate their  exalted  nature  and  character.  With  re- 
spect to  their  functions  they  are  called  servants  of  God,^ 
and  also  malakhim,  messengers,  as  we  have  seen  in  some 
of  the  passages  cited. 

A  passage  in  document  A  speaks  of  a  superhuman 
man,  calling  himself  the  chief  of  the  host  of  Jehovah, 
who  appeared  to  Joshua;  Joshua  cast  himself  on  the 
ground  before  him  and  at  his  command  removed  his 
shoes  from  his  feet,  on  account  of  the  holiness  of  the 
place. ^  The  angels  are  more  than  once  represented  as 
forming  an  army  or  a  congregation  that  surrounds  the 
throne  of  God,  to  receive  his  commands  and  execute 
them  among  men.^  This  is  their  chief  office,  and  it  is 
for  this  reason  that  they  are  called  the  servants  of  God, 
or  his  messengers.  They  sing,  besides,  the  praises  of 
God  in  his  heavenly  temple.^ 

The  angels  generally  have  the  human  form.^  In  the 
mythological  fragment.  Gen.  vi.  1-4,  they  appear  even 
as  sensual  beings.  But  as  we  have  seen,  they  are 
called  gods,  sons  of  God,  and  holy  ones;  they  were, 
then,  evidently  regarded  as  heavenly  beings,  partakers 
of    the    divine  nature,    clothed  with  superior   purity. 

1  Zech.  xiv.  5  ;  Job  v.  1 ;  xv.  15  ;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  5,  7  ;  Dan.  iv.  13,  17, 
23 ;  viii.  13. 

2  Job  iv.  18  ;  comp.  Ps.  ciii.  20  f. 

3  Josh.  V.  13-15  ;  comp.  Ex.  iii.  5. 

4  Job  i.  6  ff. ;  ii.  1  ff. ;  1  Kings  xxii.  19  ff. ;  2  Kings  vi.  16  f.  ;  Dan. 
vii.  9  f.  ;  Ps.  Ixviii.  17  ;  Ixxxix.  5-7  ;  ciii.  20  f. ;  cxlviii.  2. 

s  Job  xxxviii.  7  ;  Ps.  xxix.  1  f .,  9  ;  ciii.  20  ;  cxlviii.  2. 
6  Josh.  V.  13  ff. ;  Ezek.  ix.  2  f?.  ;  xl.  3  ff.  ;  xliii.  G  ;  Dan.  viii.  15  ff. ; 
X.  16  ff. 


SECOND   PEPwIOD. —  §  12.    MANIFESTATION   OF   GOD.      155 

According  to  the  book  of  Job,  however,  they  are  not 
absolutely  pure  in  the  eyes  of  God.^ 

Schultz,  among  others,  claims  that  the  belief  in  the 
existence  of  angels  had  its  origin  in  the  polytheism  of 
the  ancient  Semites;  that,  when  the  idea  of  a  single 
and  sovereign  God  began  to  replace  and  prevail  over 
polytheistic  ideas,  the  numerous  divinities  that  had 
hitherto  been  acknowledged,  became  elohiiti  of  an  infe- 
rior order,  bene  elohim^  angels.  He  bases  this  opinion 
mainly  upon  Gen.  iii.  22,  where  God  seems  to  be  sur- 
rounded by  beings  similar  to  himself,  and  Jud.  ix.  9 
and  13,  which  speak  of  gods,  and  contain,  as  it  were, 
echoes  of  ancient  Semitic  polytheism. ^ 

To  this  view,  "  that  the  angels  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  dethroned  gods, "  Oehler,  following  deWette,  replies, 
that  "  if  such  were  the  case,  it  is  the  first  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  and  not  tlie  last  in  which  the  angels 
should  appear  with  functions  and  names  most  clearly 
defined."^  This  reply  is  far  from  being  decisive;  sev- 
eral passages  of  document  A,  cited  above,  in  fact  prove 
that,  even  in  early  times,  the  Israelites  believed  in  the 
existence  of  a  multitude  of  angels,  and  placed  a  chief  at 
the  head  of  this  celestial  host.  What  seems,  moreover, 
to  confirm  the  view  of  Schultz,  is  the  fact  that  there  is 
nowhere  in  the  Old  Testament  any  reference  to  the 
creation  of  angels ;  it  is  fair  to  conclude  that  they  were 
regarded  as  having  always  existed;  according  to  Job 
xxxviii.  7,  they  were  present  even  during  the  work  of 
creation.* 

1  iv.  18  ;  XV.  15. 

2  II.  pp.  215  ff.  ;  comp.  I.  pp.  184  f.  and  I.  chap.  vii. 

8  §  61 ;  comp.  de  Wette,  Archeologie,  §  108.     *  Schultz,  IT.  pp.  227  f. 


156  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD    TESTAMENT. 

Since,  in  poetical  language,  the  forces  of  nature  are 
sometimes  personified  and  entitled  messengers  or  angels 
of  God,^  it  has  been  concluded  that  the  angels  were 
originally  personifications  of  the  forces  of  nature,  or, 
according  to  other  passages, ^  extraordinary  events  sent 
by  God. 2  But  it  is  evident  that  such  a  personification 
presupposes  belief  in  the  existence  of  angels.^  Most  of 
the  passages  quoted  in  favor  of  this  hypothesis,  more- 
over, are  of  recent  date,  and  therefore  lack  the  evidential 
value  attributed  to  them. 

IV.    The  Spirit  of  God. 

We  have  already  spoken  of  the  spirit  of  God  in  con- 
nection with  prophetism,  creation,  and  providence.  We 
have  recognized  its  activity  in  various  spheres.  We 
have  only  to  complete  what  we  have  said  on  this  sub- 
ject. 

We  have  seen  that  the  angel  and  the  face  of  God 
were  with  the  children  of  Israel  and  led  them  across  the 
desert.  Deutero-Isaiah  also  recalls  the  fact  that  the 
angel  of  the  face  of  God  saved  the  Israelites  from  afflic- 
tion, that  he  bore  them  and  carried  them  in  olden  times ; 
but  immediately  afterwards  he  adds  that  it  was  Jeho- 
vah who,  by  his  holy  spirit,  accomplished  this  work  of 
salvation.^  The  book  of  Nehemiah  says  that  God  gave 
his  good  spirit  to  the  children  of  Israel,  during  their 
journey  in  the  desert,   to  make  them  wise.^     Haggai 

1  Ps.  Ixxviii.  49 ;  civ.  4 ;  cxlviii.  8  ;  comp.  cxlvii.  15. 

2  Gen.  xxi.  17  ;  xxviii.  12  ;  2  Kings  xix.  35  ;  Ps.  xxxv.  5  f. ;  xxxiv. 
7 ;  xci.  11. 

3  De  "Wette,  as  above.  *  Oehler,  as  above.         ^  Isa.  Ixiii.  9-14. 
6  ix.  20. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  12.   MANIFESTATION   OF   GOD.      157 

takes  a  similar  standpoint  when  he  makes  God  say :  "  I 
am  with  you,  I  remain  faithful  to  the  covenant  that  I 
made  with  you  when  ye  came  forth  from  Egypt,  and  my 
spirit  is  in  your  midst."  ^  In  these  passages  the  spirit 
of  God  is  clearly  placed  on  the  same  level  as  several 
of  the  divine  manifestations  of  which  we  spoke  at  the 
beginning  of  this  chapter.  But  this  is  a  rare  and  late 
standpoint,  which  is  seldom  found,  especially  in  the 
earliest  documents. 

In  the  book  of  Judges,  it  is  often  said  that  the  spirit 
of  God,  taking  possession  of  the  judges,  renders  them 
capable  of  daring  projects  and  heroic  actions. ^  Accord- 
ing to  Gen.  xli.  38,  Pharaoh,  seeing  the  wonderful 
wisdom  of  Joseph,  says  to  his  servants :  "  Shall  we  find 
a  man  like  this  one,  having  in  him  the  spirit  of  God?" 
This  spirit  is,  in  fact,  considered  the  source  of  wisdom 
and  understanding,  of  counsel  and  strength.^  It  is 
granted  especially  to  the  chiefs  of  the  people  Israel, 
whose  duty  it  is  to  judge  and  govern  them.*  It  pro- 
duces fear  of  God  in  the  heart,  ^  regenerates  it,^  and 
teaches  it  to  do  the  divine  will.^  According  to  docu- 
ment C,  it  is  the  spirit  of  God  also  that  gives  to  the 
workmen  the  intelligence  and  skill  necessary  to  prepare 
the  objects  used  in  the  service  of  the  sanctuar}^,  and 
makes  them  real  artists.^  All  the  extraordinary  gifts 
of  man,  physical  and  moral,  are  regarded  as  produced 

1  ii.  5. 

2  Jud.  iii.  10  ;  vi.  34  ;  xi.  29 ;  xiii.  25 ;  xiv.  6,  19 ;  xv.  14  ;  comp. 
1  Sam.  xi.  6. 

3  Isa.  xi.  2  ;  Mic.  iii.  8  ;  Job  xxxii.  8  ;  Deut.  xxxiv.  9. 

*  Num.  xi.  17  ;  xxvii.  18 ;  Jud.  iii.  10 ;  1  Sam.  xvi.  13 ;  Isa.  xi.  2  ff. 
s  Isa.  xi.  2.  6  Ps.  li,  10  f.  ^  Ezek.  xxxvi.  27  ;  Ps.  cxliii.  10. 

8  Ex.  xxviii.  3 ;  xxxi.  3  ff.  ;  xxxv.  31  ff. 


158  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

by  the  spirit  of  Gocl.  Throughout  the  Old  Testament 
the  spirit  appears  as  essentially  a  divine  power  commu- 
nicating to  man  all  the  superior  abilities  that  he  may 
possess.^ 

The  most  characteristic  feature  of  the  activity  of  the 
divine  spirit  in  the  world  is  unquestionably  that  by 
virtue  of  which  it  is  represented  as  the  agent  of  evil. 
In  early  Hebraism  there  is  no  reference,  as  there  is  in 
the  Jewish  and  the  Christian  church,  on  the  one  hand, 
to  good  spirits,  whose  activity  is  always  beneficent, 
and,  on  the  other,  to  evil  spirits,  whose  influence  is 
always  harmful.  The  same  spirit  of  God  is  believed  to 
act  sometimes  in  the  one  way  and  sometimes  in  the 
other.  Hebraism  is  thus  as  far  removed  from  dualism 
as  from  pantheism. 

Thus,  in  order  to  explain  the  discord  that  broke  out 
between  Abimelech  and  the  inhabitants  of  Shechem,  it 
is  said,  Jud.  ix.  23,  that  God  sent  an  evil  spirit  among 
them.  The  melancholy  that  takes  possession  of  Saul  is 
referred  to  the  influence  of  an  evil  spirit  coming  from 
Jehovah,  or  of  an  evil  spirit  from  God.^  This  is  the 
Hebrew  standpoint  with  respect  to  evil  spirits;  they 
appear,  not  as  personal  beings  independent  of  God, 
least  of  all  as  beings  hostile  to  God,  but  as  simple 
emanations  or  effects  of  the  activity  of  God  in  the 
world. 

1  Knobel,  Der  Prophetismus  der  Hchraer,  I.  §  10  ;  [Schultz,  II.  pp. 
202  ff.].  ^ 

2  1  Sam.  xvi.  14-16,  23  ;  xviii.  10  ;  xix.  9. 


SECOND   PERIOD. — §  13.    THE   NATUKE   OF   MAN.      159 

§  13.     THE  NATURE   OF   MAN. 

After  having  become  acquainted  with  Jehovah,  the 
God  of  Israel,  the  God  of  the  covenant,  we  shall  next 
consider  man,  with  whom  the  covenant  was  made.  We 
shall  first  of  all  discuss  what,  in  modern  times,  has  been 
called  biblical  psycliology.  We  shall  see  how  little  this 
pretentious  term  befits  the  simple  conceptions  of  the 
Hebrews  concerning  the  human  soul. 

The  older  account  of  creation  tells  us :  "  God  formed 
man  from  the  dust  of  the  earth  and  breathed  into  his 
nostrils  a  breath  of  life,  and  man  became  a  living  soul."  ^ 
This  way  of  looking  at  the  matter  appears  elsewhere 
also  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  book  of  Job  declares 
that  man  was  formed  from  clay,^  and  that  it  is  the  breath 
of  the  Almighty  that  gives  him  life.^  It  calls  respira- 
tion the  breath  of  God  in  the  nostrils  of  man.*  It  says 
that  if  God  recalled  his  spirit  and  his  breath,  man  would 
return  to  the  dust.^  We  read  exactly  the  same  thing 
respecting  animals,  Ps.  civ.  29.  Ecclesiastes  teaches 
that,  when  man  dies,  the  dust  returns  to  the  earth  as  it 
was,  and  the  spirit,  the  vital  breath  of  man,  returns  to 
God  who  gave  it.^  Thus  the  body  of  man,  being  taken 
from  the  earth,  is  purely  material,  but  it  is  animated  by 
a  vital  breath  that  comes  from  God. 

The  body  of  man  is  often  called  flesh,"  and  this  same 
term  is  applied  to  animals,^  which  are  taken  from  the 

1  Gen.  ii.  7.  2  xxxiii.  6.  3  xxxiii.  4. 

*  xxvii.  3.  5  xxxiv.  14  f.  ^  xii.  9. 

"'  Gen.  ii.  23  f.  ;  vi.  3  ;  xxix.  14  ;  xxxvii.  27  ;  Lev.  xiii.  2  ff.  ;  Jud. 
Ix.  2 ;  2  Sam.  v.  1  ;  xix.  13. 

8  Gen.  vi.  19 ;  vii.  15  f. ;  viii.  17  ;  Lev.  xvii.  14  ;  Num.  xviii.  16. 


160  THEOLOGY   OF    THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

earth  like  man.^  The  expression  "all  flesh"  often  de- 
notes both  men  and  animals,  all  living  beings. ^  Man 
as  a  whole  is  sometimes  called  flesh  or  dust,  when  the 
object  is  to  emphasize  his  weakness,  his  nothingness, 
especially  in  contrast  with  God.^ 

Man,  vivified  by  the  creative  breath  of  God,  is  called 
7iephesh  cliayyali^  living  sonl.*  But  animals  also  are 
thus  designated.^  This  is  natural,  since  the  term 
nephesh,  whose  root  means  breathe^  often  denotes  only  the 
principle  of  life,  as  numerous  passages  testify.  How- 
ever, in  just  as  many  passages  the  same  term  serves  to 
designate  the  spiritual  part  of  man,  the  seat  of  all  the 
affections,  and  the  organ  of  all  the  functions  of  tli>e  soul. 

Hence  we  must  conclude  that  the  vital  principle  and 
spiritual  part  of  man,  to  the  thought  of  the  Hebrews, 
were  one,  that  they  did  not  distinguish  the  principle  of 
life  from  the  principle  that  thinks,  feels,  and  wills. 
According  to  the  Old  Testament,  the  seat  of  the  soul  is 
in  the  blood. ^  This  is  another  proof  that  the  Hebrews 
identified  the  principle  of  corporeal  with  that  of  spirit- 
ual life.  The  idea  that  the  seat  of  the  soul  is  in  the 
blood,  moreover,  is  easily  explained.  Since  the  soul  is 
the  principle  of  life,  and  life  ceases  after  a  great  loss  of 
blood,  nothing  was  more  natural  for  the  untaught  ob- 
server than  to  conclude  that  the  soul  resided  in  the 
blood. 

1  Gen.  ii.  19  ;  comp.  i.  24. 

2  Gen.  vi.  12  f.,  17  ;  ix.  11,  16  f. ;  Num.  xvL  22  ;  xviii.  15  ;  xxvii.  16  ; 
Jer.  xxxii.  27. 

3  Gen.  xviii.  27  ;  Isa.  xxxi.  3  ;  xl.  6  f .  ;  Jer.  xvii.  5 ;  2  Chron.  xxxii. 
8  ;  Ps.  Ivi.  4  ;  Ixxviii.  39  ;  ciii.  14.  ^  Gen.  ii.  7. 

5  Gen,  ii.  19  ;  i.  20  f.,  24,  30  ;  ix.  10,  12,  16. 

6  Gen.  ix.  4  f. ;  Lev.  xvii.  11,  14  ;  Dent.  xii.  23. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  13.   THE  NATURE   OF  MAN.      161 

Besides  a  nephesh,  the  Old  Testament  represents  man 
as  possessed  of  a  ruach,  spirit.  The  root  of  this  word 
also  means  breathe  and  blow.  Thus  it  is  used  to  denote 
the  wind  and  the  breath.  Moreover,  it  denotes  the 
principle  of  life  in  men  and  animals. i  Nothing,  again, 
is  more  natural  than  this  way  of  thinking  and  speak- 
ing, since  respiration,  the  breath,  is  the  visible  sign  of 
life,  and  the  two  cease  together.  The  ruacJi,  like  the 
nephesh,  is  besides,  as  appears  from  numerous  passages, 
the  origin  of  all  the  affections,  and  all  the  functions  of 
the  human  soul,  the  spiritual  part  of  man. 

There  is  then  a  close  resemblance  between  the  nephesh 
and  the  ruach.  It  even  seems  as  if  they  are  only  two 
different  names  to  designate  one  and  the  same  thing. 
Thus,  to  cite  only  a  few  examples.  Job  xii.  10  affirms 
that  Jehovah  holds  in  his  hand  the  soul  of  everything 
that  lives,  the  spirit  of  all  human  flesh.  A  prophet 
cries  to  God;  "My  soul  desireth  thee  in  the  night,  my 
spirit  within  me  seeketh  thee. "  2  To  denote  impatience, 
the  expression  used  is  either  the  nephesh  is  shortened, s 
or  the  ruach  is  shortened. *  When  life  departs,  the  ex- 
pression employed  is  either  the  spirit  departs,^  or  the 
soul  departs.6  Likewise,  when  life  returns  to  a  person, 
it  is  said  the  spirit  has  returned  to  him,^  or  the  soul 
has  returned  to  him.^  Sorrow  affects  both  the  spirit 
and  the  soul.^    Bitterness  is  predicated  of  the  spirit, i<^ 

1  Gen.  vi.  17  ;  xlv.  27;  Jud.  xv.  19 ;  1  Sam.  xxx.  12  ;  Job  xii.  10  • 
Eccl.  iii.  19,  21  ;  viii.  8  ;  Isa.  Ivii.  16  ;  Ezek.  x.  17  ;  xxxvii.  8  ;  Hab.' 
"•  ^^-  2  Isa.  xxvi.  9. 

3  Num.  xxi.  4.       4  Job  xxi.  4  ;  Ex.  vi.  9.        5  pg.  ixxvii.  3  ;  cxlvi.  4. 

6  Gen.  XXXV.  18  ;  1  Kings  xix.  4  ;  Jon.  iv.  3  ;  Ps.  cvii.  5. 

7  Jud.  XV.  19 ;  1  Sam.  xxx.  12.  s  i  Kin^s  xvii  21  f 
^Jobvii.  11.                                                      10  Gen.  Ixvi.  35. 


162  THEOLOGY   OF    THE   OLD   TESTAJVIENT. 

and  of  the  soul,^  and  so  forth.  If  we  cared  to  take  the 
pains  to  carry  this  parallelism  farther,  we  should  see 
that  the  spirit  appears  as  the  organ  and  seat  of  all  the 
spiritual  faculties  of  man,  and  that  it  is  precisely  so  with 
the  soul. 

A  third  term,  but  one  that  is  much  less  frequently 
employed  than  the  two  preceding,  has  their  principal 
significations.  It  is  neshamah,  whose  root  means  blow, 
and  which  denotes  both  the  breath  and  the  principle  of 
life. 2  It  is  applied  in  this  sense  to  men  and  animals.^ 
But  it  denotes  also  the  intellectual  principle  that  comes 
to  man  from  God,  and  it  is  employed  as  a  synonym  of 
ruacJiA 

We  come  finally  to  lebh  and  lebhabh,  that  is  to  say, 
the  heart.  The  heart  seems  in  some  passages  to  be 
regarded  as  the  seat  or  centre  of  corporeal  life.  In 
takiuQf  food  one  strenofthens  one's  heart.^  1  Sam.  xxv. 
37  also  says  that  the  heart  of  Nabal  died  and  became 
like  a  stone,  which  probably  means  that  Nabal  was 
smitten  with  apoplexy  (Reuss).  These  are,  however, 
isolated  passages,  exceptions  to  the  rule  illustrated  by 
numerous  examples  that  the  soul  and  the  spirit  appear 
as  the  principle  of  corporeal  life.  It  is  worthy  of  special 
attention  that  while  the  nephesh  and  the  ruach  are  both 
attributed  to  animals,  this  is  not  the  case  with  lebh  ;  a 
sufficient  proof  that  there  is  a  real  difference  between 
the  first  two  and  the  last.  As  organs  of  spiritual  life, 
however,  they  greatly  resemble  one  another. 

1  1  Sam.  i.  10  ;  Job  xxvii.  2. 

2  Gen.  ii.  7  ;  Deut.  xx.  16  ;  Josli.  x.  40  ;  xi.  11,  14  ;  1  Kings  xvii.  11  ; 
Job  xxvii.  3  ;  Isa.  ii.  22  ;  Ivii.  16.  ^  Gen.  vii.  22  ;  comp.  Ps.  cl.  6. 

*  Job  xxxii.  8  ;  xxxiii.  4  ;  xxxiv.  14  ;  Prov.  xx.  27  ;  Isa.  xlii.  5. 
6  Gen.  xviii.  5  ;  Jud.  xix.  5,  8  ;  Ps.  civ.  15  ;  comp.  1  Kings  xxi.  7. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  13.    THE   NATURE   OF   MAN.      163 

We  will  first  consider  some  passages  in  which  soul 
and  heart  are  employed  as  synonyms.  Thus  the  re- 
membrance of  the  benefits  of  God  is  to  be  preserved 
both  in  the  soul  and  in  the  heart.  ^  The  words  of  Jeho- 
vah are  to  be  laid  up  in  the  soul  and  in  the  heart ;  ^  God 
must  be  sought  with  all  the  heart  and  with  all  the  soul ;  ^ 
one  must  turn  to  him  with  all  one's  heart  and  all  one's 
soul,^  love  him,  serve  him,  obey  him,  fulfil  his  com- 
mands with  all  one's  heart  and  all  one's  soul;^  finally, 
his  faithfulness  deserves  the  gratitude  of  the  whole 
heart  and  the  whole  soul.^  Sorrows  and  anxieties  alike 
find  room  in  the  soul  and  in  the  heart.'''  The  soul  is 
puffed  up  as  well  as  the  heart.  ^ 

There  are  some  special  features  in  which  the  heart 
resembles  the  spirit.  The  spirit  and  the  heart  may 
both  err. 9  Lack  of  courage  is  a  fault  not  only  of  the 
heart,  but  also  of  the  spirit. ^^  Contention  and  humility 
affect  both  the  heart  and  the  spirit  ;^i  it  is  the  same 
with  sadness,  dejection,  internal  agitation, ^2  j^g  ^g]]^  ^g 
fear.i^ 

Man  should  renew  his  heart  and  his  spirit.^*  God 
can  and  will  give  him  a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit. ^^ 
Reflection  takes  place  in  the  heart,  but  the  spirit  also 
meditates.  ^^ 


I  Deut.  iv.  9.        2  Deut.  xi.  18.        s  Deut.  iv.  29.        *  Deut.  xxx.  10. 

5  Deut.  vi.  5  ;  x.  12  ;  xi.  13  ;  xiii.  3  ;  xxvi.  16  ;  xxx.  2  ;  Josh.  xxii.  5. 

6  Josh,  xxiii.  14.  ^  Ps.  xiii.  2. 

8  Comp.  Prov.  xxviii.  25  with  xxi.  4,  and  Ps.  ci.  5. 

9  Isa.  xxix.  24 ;  Ps.  xcv.  10.  ^^  Josh.  ii.  11 ;  v.  1. 

II  Ps.  xxxiv.  18  ;  li.  17  ;  Isa.  Ivii.  15. 

12  Isa.  Ixv.  14  ;  Ps.  cxliii.  4 ;  Prov.  xv.  3.  13  Ezek.  xxi.  7. 

14  Ezek.  xviii.  31.  i^  Ezek.  xxxvi.  26  ;  xi.  19  ;  Ps,  li.  10. 

16  Ps.  Ixxvii.  6. 


164  THEOLOGY   OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

It  must  have  been  noticed  that  we  have  brought  for- 
ward almost  exclusively  passages  in  which  the  heart  is 
mentioned  as  synonymous  with,  or  as  playing  the  same 
part  as,  the  soul  or  the  spirit.  This  parallelism  might 
be  carried  farther  if  we  cared  to  take  into  account  all 
the  passages  in  which  there  is  a  reference  to  either  of 
the  three  alone.  Any  one  who  undertook  this  task 
would  find  that  all  the  affections  and  all  the  functions 
of  our  spiritual  being  are  referred  in  turn  to  all  of 
them.  Each  appears  as  the  organ  and  the  seat  of  all 
the  faculties  of  the  soul,  feeling,  will,  intelligence, 
as  well  as  of  moral  and  religious  life.  There  is,  there- 
fore, no  essential  difference  among  them,  and  it  is  an 
error  to  suppose,  with  Beck  ^  and  Delitzsch,^  that  the 
Old  Testament  attaches  to  each  of  these  three  terms  a 
peculiar  signification,  that  it  contains  a  psychological 
system  with  a  perfectly  definite  terminology.  We  must, 
on  the  contrary,  with  Harless  ^  and  Hofmann,*  ac- 
knowledge that  the  Bible  no  more  contains  a  scientific 
psychology  than  a  scientific  cosmology.  Schultz  shares 
this  view.  After  having  shown  that  in  certain  passages 
the  expression  "my  soul"  may  alternate  with  "my 
flesh"  or  "my  bones"  when  the  ego  as  a  sensitive  per- 
sonality is  meant, ^  he  reaches  the  conclusion  that  in 
this  regard  the  Old  Testament  freely  employs  the  pop- 
ular words  of  expression ;  that  all  that  can  confidently 
be  asserted  is  that  the  Scriptures  distinguish  between 
the  corporeal  substratum  and  the  life  that  reveals  itself 
therein ;  that  this  life  is  called  spirit,  when  the  object 

1  Umriss  der  hihl.  Seelenlehre.         2  System  of  Biblical  Psychology. 
8  Christl.  Ethik,  5  ed.  p.  xiii.  *  Theolorfie,  I.  pp.  284  f. 

'^  Ps.  vi.  2  f.  ;  xvi.  9  ;  xxxii.  3 ;  xixv.  10  ;  Ixiii.  1 ;  Ixxxiv.  2. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  13.    THE   NATURE   OF   MAN.      165 

is  to  emphasize  its  relations  with  God,  and  soul  or  heart 
when  the  stress  is  on  personal  life;  that  in  elevated 
discourse  these  terms  are  often  used  one  for  another, 
or  in  the  same  connection  as  complements  of  one  an- 
other, i  We  must  certainly  admit  that  on  this  subject, 
as  on  so  many  others,  the  authors  of  the  Old  Testament 
used  popular  language  and  not  that  of  the  schools; 
that  they  spoke  of  the  human  soul,  spirit,  and  heart  as 
we  ourselves  often  speak  of  them,  i.e.  including  under 
each  of  these  terms  our  entire  spiritual  being,  with  all 
its  faculties. 

There  exist,  hoAvever,  some  distinctions  among  these 
terms.  Thus  nephesh  is  sometimes  synonymous  with 
person,  individual,  like  the  word  soul  in  French  and 
German. 2  In  the  latter  sense  it  may  even  denote  dead 
persons.^  It  may  also  take  the  place  of  the  personal 
pronoun;  in  which  case  my  soul,  thy  soul,  his  soul, 
means  myself,  thyself,  himself,  or  one's  self.*  Neither 
spirit  nor  heart  is  used  in  this  sense.  It  is  therefore 
soLil  that  seems  to  denote  more  particularly  man's  per- 
sonality, his  ego.  Man  is  a  soul,  he  is  not  a  spirit  or 
a  heart;  he  has  a  spirit  and  a  heart. '^  The  soul  is  the 
nobler  part,  the  glory  of  man.^ 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  the  heart  that  is  almost  ex- 
clusively the  organ  of  thought,  intelligence,  knowledge. 

1  II.  pp.  249  ff. 

2  Gen.  xii.  5;  xvii.  14  ;  xlvi.  15,  18,  22,  25-27;  Ex.  i.  5;  xii.  19; 
xvi.  16 ;  Lev.  ii.  1 ;  iv.  2,  27  ;  etc. 

3  Lev.  xix.  28;  xxi.  1,  11;  xxii.  4;  Num.  v.  2;  vi.  6,  11;  ix. 
6  f.,  10. 

^  Gen.  xxvii.  4,  19,  25  ;  Jud.  xvi.  30  ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  3  ;  xx.  17. 

6  Comp.  Oehler,  §  70. 

6  Gen.  xlix.  6  ;  Ps.  vii.  5  ;  xvi.  9  ;  Ivii.  8  ;  cviii.  1. 


166  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

There  are  only  a  few  passages  in  which  the  soul  and 
the  spirit  perform  the  functions  of  intelligence. ^  The 
heart  is,  moreover,  the  moral  and  religious  faculty  par 
excellence.  It  is  represented  as  the  organ  of  moral  con- 
sciousness 2  and  as  the  source  of  life  in  the  sense  of 
happiness  and  salvation. ^  But  it  also  appears  as  the 
chief  source  of  sin.^  It  must  needs  be  circumcised^ 
because  it  is  uncircumcised.^  The  law  of  God  must  be 
graven  on  it.'^  It  is  that  of  which  God  takes  most 
account  in  judging  of  man's  true  character.^  God 
sounds  it  and  he  alone  knows  it.^ 

Often  also  the  reins  are  placed  in  parallelism  with 
the  heart,  denoting  the  most  private,  secret  recess  of 
man's  spiritual  nature. ^^  The  various  terms  that  denote 
the  bowels  are  found  used  in  almost  the  same  sense,  but 
with  the  added  idea  of  compassion. ^^  On  the  other  hand, 
the  head  and  the  brain,  which  play  so  important  a  part 
as  the  seat  of  thought  among  moderns,  are  not  men- 
tioned in  this  sense  in  the  early  literature  of  Israel. 
It  is  the  late  book  of  Daniel  that  speaks  of  "  visions  of 
the  head,  "12  while  Jeremiah,  conforming  to  the  lan- 

I  Josh,  xxiii.  14  ;  Ps.  cxxxix.  14  ;  Prov.  xix.  2  ;  1  Chron.  xxviii.  12  ; 
Job  xxxii.  8.  2  Job  xxvii.  6.  ^  prov.  iv.  23  ;  comp.  xxiii.  26. 

4  Gen.  vi.  5  ;  viii.  21 ;  Jer.  iii.  17  ;  v.  23 ;  xvi.  12  ;  Ezek.  xi.  21  ; 
Eccl.  viii.  11  ;  ix.  3  ;  Ps.  v.  9  ;  xcv.  10 ;  ci.  4  ;  etc. 

6  Deut.  X.  16  ;  xxx.  6.  ^  Lev.  xxvi.  41 ;  Ezek.  xliv.  9. 

7  Deut.  vi.  6 ;  Jer.  xxxi.  33.  ^  i  gam.  xvi.  7. 
9  1  Kings  viii.  39  ;  Prov.  xvii.  3 ;  Ps.  xvii.  3. 

i<>  Jer.  xi.  20 ;  xvii.  10 ;  xx.  12  ;  Ps.  vii.  9  ;  xvi.  7 ;  xxvi.  2  ;  Ixxiii. 
21 ;  Prov.  xxiii.  15  f .  ;  Job  xix.  27. 

II  Gen.  xliii.  30  ;  1  Kings  iii.  26  ;  Amos  i.  11  ;  Isa.  xvi.  11 ;  xlvii.  6  ; 
Lam.  i.  20 ;  Job  xxx.  27  ;  Prov.  xii.  10  ;  xx.  27 ;  Ps.  xxxix.  3 ;  xl.  8 ; 
Ixiv.  6  ;  ciii.  1  ;  cix.  22. 

12  ii.  28  ;  iv.  5,  10,  13  :  vii.  1,  15. 


SECOND  PEKIOD.  —  §  14.    THE   DIGNITY  OF   MAN.      167 

guage  of  the  early  Hebrews,  says :  "  The  visions  of  the 
heart."! 

It  has  been  supposed  that  the  idea  of  the  pre-exist- 
ence  of  the  soul  is  discoverable  in  certain  passages  of 
the  Old  Testament;  2  this  is  not  the  case.^  It  is  found 
only  in  an  apocryphal  book.*  The  older  account  of 
creation  teaches  the  contrary;  according  to  it  man's 
body  was  first  formed  and  the  soul  was  afterward  im- 
parted to  it. 5  And,  according  to  document  C,  God 
created  man  in  his  own  image,^  i.e.  body  and  soul  at 
the  same  time,  and  established  the  law  of  reproduction 
for  man  as  well  as  for  animals. ^  Adam  is  thus  enabled 
to  beget  a  son  in  his  own  image, ^  body  and  soul. 


§  14.   THE  DIGNITY  OF  MAN. 

The  accounts  of  creation  themselves  emphasize  the 
exceptional  dignity  of  man.  In  the  older  of  these 
accounts  we  see  God  giving  especial  care  to  the  crea- 
tion of  human  beings.^  The  way  in  which  he  breathes 
the  breath  of  life  into  the  nostrils  of  Adam  seems  to 
establish  a  peculiar  relation  between  his  life  and  that 
of  man.  We  have  seen  above  that  the  Old  Testament 
sometimes  puts  men  and  animals  into  the  same  category, 
applying  to  them  indiscriminately  the  designation  "all 
flesh,"  and  attributing  to  both  the  nephesJi  and  the 
ruach;  this  account,   on  the    contrary,   establishes   an 

1  xxiii.  16.  2  1  Sam,  ii.  6  ;  Job  i.  21 ;  Ps.  cxxxix.  15. 

3  De  Wette,  §  115,  Archeologie  ;  von  Colin,  Theologie,  §  40  ;  Oehler, 
§  70  ;  Schultz,  IT.  pp.  250  ff.  4  ^jg^  yjij^  jg  f^ 

5  Gen.  ii.  7.  e  Qen.  i.  26  f.  ^  Gen.  i.  22,  28.* 

«  Gen.  V.  3.  9  Gen.  ii.  7,  21  f. 


168  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

essential  distinction  between  them,  exalting  man  far 
above  the  animals  and  all  other  created  things.  God, 
after  the  creation  of  man,  planted  the  garden  of  Eden, 
that  he  might  till  and  tend  it.^  It  is  man  also  for  whom 
the  animals  were  created,  and  they  were  brought  to  him 
that  he  might  give  them  names. ^  In  the  chapters  that 
immediately  follow,  the  animal  and  the  vegetable  king- 
dom are  both  made  subject  to  man.^  But  among  the 
animals,  man  finds  no  helpmeet  for  him.^  Then  God 
creates  woman,  taking  her  from  man,  in  order  that  she 
may  be  a  help  like  him.^ 

Man  and  woman,  then,  occupy  an  exceptional  and 
peculiarly  exalted  position  in  the  work  of  creation ;  all 
else  is  only  for  them,  for  their  use.  However,  in  con- 
formity to  the  universal  sentiment  of  antiquity,  the 
position  of  man  is  even  more  exalted  than  that  of 
woman.  Woman  was  created  only  for  the  sake  of  man, 
to  be  a  help  to  him,^  and  she  is  taken  from  him.  All 
this  indicates  a  kind  of  inferiority,  a  kind  of  depend- 
ence of  woman  over  against  man.  The  distance  that 
separates  the  one  from  the  other,  however,  should  not 
be  exaggerated.  In  v.  24  of  our  narrative,  we  see  that 
man  must  place  above  all  other  ties  those  that  unite 
him  to  his  wife,  and  that  after  their  union  they  form 
one  flesh.  At  the  same  time,  therefore,  with  the  su- 
premacy of  man  and  the  subordination  of  woman,  their 
equality  in  certain  respects  is  also  recognized. 

The  account  of  creation  in  document  C,^  dating  from 
a  time  when  Israelitish  thought  was  further  developed, 
presents  the  same  ideas,  but  in  a  new  form  and  with  a 

1  Gen.  ii.  8-15.  2  Qen.  ii.  19  f.  ^  Gen.  iii.  21 ;  iv.  3  f. 

4  Gen.  ii.  20.        &  Gen.  ii.  21-23.         «  Gen.  ii.  18,  20,         7  Gen.  i. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  14.   THE  DIGNITY   OF  MAN.      169 

more  philosophic  cast.  Here  the  first  human  pair  is 
not  created  until  after  all  the  rest.  This,  no  doubt,  is 
meant  to  indicate  that,  to  the  thought  of  the  author, 
man  is  the  end  and  crown  of  the  work  of  creation,  that 
he  is  its  lord  and  master,  and  that  he  should  not  appear 
upon  the  scene  until  all  else  is  ready  and  can  be  placed 
at  his  service.  As  soon  as  man  is  created  he  is  called 
to  rule  over  all  other  terrestrial  creatures;  the  plants 
also,  it  is  said,  are  to  serve  him  for  food.i  The  expres- 
sion in  V.  26,  "And  God  said:  Let  us  make  man," 
indicates  a  special  determination,  and  as  it  were  a  solemn 
act  on  the  part  of  God.  This  creative  act  is  therefore 
not  like  the  others  introduced  by  the  simple  expression : 
"God  said."  Verses  26  f.  declare,  besides,  that  God 
created  man  in  his  own  image  and  after  his  own  like- 
ness. It  is  clear  that  this  account  emphasizes  and 
specifies  the  peculiar  dignity  of  man  and  his  superiority 
over  the  rest  of  creation.  Here,  however,  there  is  no 
trace  of  inequality  between  woman  and  man.  They 
are  both  formed  by  the  same  creative  act;  they  are  both 
like  God.  Besides  this  difference  between  documents 
A  and  C,  it  should  be  noted  that,  according  to  the 
former,  man  did  not  originally  resemble  God,  and  was 
not  intended  to  be  like  him ;  on  the  contrary,  he  became 
guilty  and  brought  upon  himself  the  ills  of  life  by  wish- 
ing to  become  like  God,  and  like  him  to  know  how  to 
distinguish  between  good  and  evil.^  The  older  docu- 
ment does  not,  therefore,  attribute  to  man  so  exalted 
a  dignity  as  the  other. 

In  precisely  what  consists  the  image  of  God  in  man? 
Theology  has  read  many  things  into  this  expression. 
1  Gen.  i.  28  f .  2  gee  Gen.  ui.  and  §  19. 


170  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

In  the  first  place  it  has  distinguished  between  the  image 
of  God  and  his  likeness.  This  is  a  serious  error.  Though 
in  V.  26  there  is  reference  to  the  image  and  the  likeness 
of  God,  in  v.  27  it  is  only  the  former  to  which  refer- 
ence is  made,  which  seems  to  indicate  that  the  two 
terms  are  synonymous.  The  use  of  both  in  v.  26  is 
probably  only  an  illustration  of  the  law  of  parallelism, 
which  plays  an  important  part  in  the  elevated  style  of 
Hebrew  literature.  According  to  Oehler  the  second 
term  serves  only  to  reinforce  the  first  ;^  others  find  this 
sole  difference  between  the  two,  that  the  first  is  concrete 
and  the  second  abstract.^ 

In  early  Protestant  theology  the  image  of  God  in  man 
was  the  state  of  moral  perfection  that  was  lost  by  the 
fall.  This  is  incorrect;  the  document  that  mentions  the 
fall  does  not  speak  of  this  image,  and  vice  versa.  Ac- 
cording to  document  C,  which  alone  speaks  of  it,  this 
image  is  preserved  despite  the  corruption  that  causes 
the  deluge.^  If  we  allow  ourselves  to  be  guided  by  the 
context,  we  see  that  the  resemblance  of  man  to  God 
consists  chiefly  in  dominion  over  all  things,  and  espe- 
cially over  the  animals.  For  it  is  said:  "Let  us  make 
man  in  our  image,  after  our  likeness,  and  let  him  rule 
over  the  fish  of  the  sea,  over  the  birds  of  heaven, 
over  the  beasts,  over  all  the  earth,  and  over  all  the  rep- 
tiles that  crawl  on  the  earth."  Ps.  viii.  also  makes 
this  superiority  of  man,  that  allies  him  to  divinity,  con- 
sist in  dominion  over  all  the  works  of  God,  and  espe- 
cially  over   the    animals.*     Havernick,^   Oehler,^   and 

1  §  68.  2  Schultz,  II.  pp.  257  f.  ;  Hofmann,  Schriftbeiveis,  I. 
p.  287.  3  Gen.  ix.  6 ;  comp.  v.  3. 

4  vv.  6-9.  5  Theologie,  p.  96.  «  §  68. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  14.   THE   DIGNITY   OF   MAN.      171 

Schultz,^  however,  combat  the  idea  that  the  resem- 
blance of  man  to  God  consists  in  such  dominion,  be- 
cause, they  say,  it  is  only  the  consequence  of  the 
superiority  of  man,  and  not  this  superiority  itself.  This 
distinction  is  very  just ;  but  was  it  made  by  the  author 
of  document  C,  or  by  that  of  Ps.  viii.  ?  Nothing 
indicates  that  this  is  the  case  or  renders  such  a  sup- 
position tenable.  We  have  seen,  on  the  contrary, 
that  the  early  Israelites  were  little  inclined  to  subtle 
distinctions. 

It  is  easy  to  understand  why,  in  Israel,  the  superior- 
ity of  man  and  his  resemblance  to  God  were  made  to 
consist,  above  all,  in  ruling  ability.  Be  it  remembered 
that  of  all  the  attributes  of  God,  that  which  the  Old 
Testament  extols  most  persistently  is  his  controlling 
might.  It  is,  therefore,  at  once  simple  and  natural  that, 
in  speaking  of  the  resemblance  of  man  to  God,  it  should 
be  made  to  consist  in  the  divine  perfection  par  excel- 
lence, the  feature  of  divinity  from  the  Israelitish  stand- 
point most  characteristic  of  it ;  in  other  words,  that  there 
should  be  attributed  to  man  as  the  mark  of  his  superi- 
ority the  ability  to  rule  like  God,  the  supreme  ruler. 
But  though  the  most  salient  attribute  of  God  was  taken 
as  a  point  of  comparison,  this  does  not  mean  that  the 
divine  perfections  in  general  did  not  find  subordinate 
consideration.  This  also,  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
Old  Testament,  is  very  natural.  We  have  seen  that  the 
Israelites  pictured  to  themselves  God  in  the  human 
form.  Hence  they  would  necessarily  think  that,  in 
creating  man,  God  exactly  copied  himself,  that  he  cre- 
ated him  exactly  in  his  own  image.     And  since  they 

1 II.  p.  257. 


172  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

certainly  gave  God  a  body,  and  did  not  regard  him  as 
a  pure  spirit,  they  probably  thought  that  man  resembled 
God,  and  God  man,  both  corporeally  and  spiritually.^ 

It  is  therefore  a  false  interpretation  of  Gen.  i.  26, 
that  claims  to  find  in  it  the  assertion  of  the  moral  per- 
fection of  man.  What  ought  to  have  made  this  clear  is 
the  fact  that  after  the  fall  and  the  corruption  of  morals 
that  appears  at  the  time  of  the  deluge,  document  C  con- 
tinues to  predicate  of  man  resemblance  to  God.^  Gen. 
i.  31,  it  is  true,  implies  the  thought  that  man  was 
created  good;  but  he  is  simply  regarded  as  good  in  the 
same  sense  as  the  other  creatures;  i,e.  inasmuch  as,  by 
the  creative  act,  he  has  received  the  corporeal  and  spir- 
itual qualities  necessary  for  the  realization  of  the  idea 
of  man. 3  There  is  no  reference  in  this  passage  to  moral 
perfection. 

What  we  have  just  said  does  not  amount  to  a  denial 
that  the  moral  supremacy  of  man  is  taught  in  the  Old 
Testament.  It  only  shows  that  the  classic  passages 
quoted  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  of  the  moral  perfection 
of  man  leave  his  moral  nature  entirely  in  the  back- 
ground. But  having  once  established  this,  we  abide  by 
the  assertion  that  the  Old  Testament  insists  on  our 
moral  dignity.  Only,  instead  of  seeking  the  proof  of 
this  assertion  in  an  expression  that  in  reality  does  not 
contain  it,  and  that  occurs  only  twice  in  a  single  doc- 
ument in  the  entire  literature  of  the  Hebrews,  we  be- 

1  Comp.  Schoeberlein,  Schaff-Herzog's  Cyclopedia^  art.  Image  of 
God;  Reuss,  Hist.  Sainte,  L  p.  282. 

2  Gen.  V.  3  ;  ix.  6. 

3  Schultz,  n.  p.  262 ;  MtUler,  Christian  Doctrine  of  /Sin,  II.  pp. 
3491 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  15.   FAITHFULNESS.  173 

lieve  that  we  find  it  taught  in  this  literature  as  a  whole. 
Not  that  it  is  often  explicitly  asserted;  it  is  rather 
everywhere  taken  for  granted.  What  is  implied  by 
the  fundamental  idea  of  the  religion  of  Israel,  the  cov- 
enant of  God  with  man  ?  What  is  presupposed  by  the 
legal  regime,  which  gives  man  the  choice  between  good 
and  evil,  blessing  and  cursing,  life  and  death  ?  Doubt- 
less it  is  something  different  from  that  which  tradi- 
tional theology  claims  to  find  in  the  Hebrew  canon 
touching  the  moral  dignity  of  man,  a  state  of  original 
but  temporary  perfection  which  was  soon  totally  for- 
feited. But  the  principal  fault  of  this  theology  is  that 
it  has  found  in  the  Bible  precisely  what  it  does  not  con- 
tain and  has  not  been  able  to  discover  what  is  clearly 
taught  therein.  We  must,  however,  devote  a  special 
chapter  to  the  further  discussion  of  the  great  subject  of 
the  fall,  to  which  we  have  here  alluded. 


§  15.    PAITHPULNESS   TO   JEHOVAH. 

Having  learned  to  know  God  and  man  according  to 
the  conceptions  current  in  Israel,  we  must  now  see  what 
God  requires  of  man. 

Jehovah  is  a  God  whose  nature  it  is  to  be  faithful  to 
his  people ;  but  he  requires  in  return  that  his  people 
shall  also  be  faithful  to  him.  Faithfulness  to  Jehovah 
is  the  cardinal  virtue  in  Israel.  This  appears  every- 
where in  the  Old  Testament,  in  the  historical,  the 
prophetical,  the  legal,  and  the  didactic  portions.  Every- 
where and  in  all  the  forms  of  language,  the  sacred 
writers  teach  Israel  that  they  are  to  serve  their  God, 
that  they  are  to  serve  him  alone,  and  serve  him  in  all 


174      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

faithfulness.  But  how  was  this  faithfuhiess  conceived? 
upon  what  sentiments  was  it  to  rest?  and  in  what  way 
was  it  to  be  translated  into  life  ? 

The  essential  mark  of  faithfulness  and  the  moral  life 
in  Israel  is  obedience  to  God.  The  old  covenant  is  the 
regime  of  law ;  God  commands  and  man  is  to  obey ;  he 
is  to  obey  God  even  in  the  least  details  of  life,  since 
the  legislation  of  each  of  the  documents  of  the  Penta- 
teuch undertakes  the  regulation  of  these  details.  The 
people  Israel,  as  regards  Jehovah,  occup}^  the  position 
of  a  subject  toward  his  master,  a  son  toward  his  father, 
a  wife  toward  her  husband,  a  servant  toward  his  mas- 
ter or  lord ;  ^  now  each  of  these  positions  implies  chiefly 
obedience  toward  God.  The  Old  Testament  knows  no 
morality  but  religious  morality,  according  to  which  the 
virtue  of  any  act  consists  in  the  fulfilment  of  the  will 
of  God.  In  Israel  the  moral  life  and  the  religious  life 
are  indissolubly  united. 

The  faithful  fulfilment  of  the  commands  of  God  is 
generally  designated  in  the  Old  Testament  by  the  term 
righteousness,^  which  we  might  render  normalcy  of  con- 
duct. The  faithful  Israelite  is  everywhere  represented 
as  a  righteous  person.  Since  Israelitish  piety  was  in 
a  way  identified  with  the  observance  of  the  commands 
of  God,  or  righteousness,  this  last  term  is  often  synony- 
mous with  piety.  In  the  Psalms  especially  the  right- 
eous are  frequently  contrasted  with  the  wicked;  they 
are  the  pious  men  in  Israel. 

Israelitish  virtue,  righteousness,  piety,  since  they 
consisted  essentially  in  the  observance  of  the  commands 
of  God,  were  very  external ;  first,  because  the  law  was 
1  See  §  4.  2  Deut.  vi.  25  ;  Ezek.  xviii.  5-9  ;  etc. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  15.   FAITHFULNESS.  175 

always  composed  largely  of  ritualistic  regulations, 
which  indeed,  in  document  C,  completely  predominate, 
and,  secondly,  because  this  law  was  imposed  from  with- 
out. Righteousness  and  morality  in  Israel  are  in  great 
measure  simply  legality.  Moreover,  the  principal 
motive  to  righteousness  and  faithfulness  is  external 
and  selfish ;  viz.  promises  of  earthly  blessings  in  case  of 
faithfulness,  and  threats  of  earthly  penalties  in  case  of 
unfaithfulness,  as  we  shall  see  later. 

Internal  tendencies,  however,  the  sentiments  of  the 
heart,  which  shall  result  in  faithfulness,  are  not  lost 
sight  of.  Deuteronomy,  for  example,  requires  that  the 
law  of  God  be  taken  to  heart,  and  that  it  remain  in 
the  heart;  1  that  God  be  sought  and  served  with  all  the 
heart  and  all  the  soul;^  and  above  all,  that  he  be  feared 
and  loved  with  all  the  heart  and  all  the  soul.^  Out- 
side of  this  book  the  fear  of  God  is  often  enjoined  as  the 
fundamental  principle  of  piety  and  the  principal  motive 
to  faithfulness,  to  righteousness.*  This  sentiment, 
which  dominates  Israelitish  piety  and  virtue,  is,  in  fact, 
of  inferior  value.  It  is  found  in  intimate  connection 
with  the  idea  that  Jehovah  is  first  of  all  a  mighty  God, 
just  and  holy,  who  will  not  let  evil  go  unpunished. 
Hence  the  numerous  threats  of  punishment,  directed 
against  unfaithfulness,  in  the  law  and  the  prophets. 
But,  alongside  of  this  sentiment,  we  find  also  in  Deuter- 
onomy —  not  however,  it  is  true,  in  so  many  passages  — 

1  Ti.  6  ;  xi.  18.  2  iy,  29  ;  xxvi.  16  ;  xxviii.  47;  xxx.  2,  10. 

Mv.  10;  V.  29;  vi.  2,  5,  13,  24;  viii.  6;  x.  12,  20;  xi.  1,  13,  22; 
xiii.  3  f. ;  xiv.  23 ;  xvii.  19 ;  xix.  9  ;  xxviii.  58  ;  xxx.  6,  16,  20  ;  xxxi. 
12  f. 

4  Gen.  xxii.  12  ;  1  Sam.  xii.  24  ;  Job  i.  1,  8 ;  ii.  3  ;  Eccl.  xii.  15  ;  etc. 


176      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

the  sentiment  of  love  in  God.  In  the  Old  Testament, 
in  general,  there  is  more  frequent  reference  to  the 
holiness  and  the  righteousness  of  God  than  to  his  love, 
and  the  Israelites  are  more  frequently  exhorted  therein 
to  fear  Jehovah  than  to  love  him.  The  idea  formed 
of  God  and  the  sentiments  felt  toward  him  are  indeed 
closely  related  to  one  another.  In  some  passages  be- 
sides these  in  Deuteronomy,  and  even  in  one  place  in 
document  A,  love  to  God  is  expressly  represented  as 
a  fundamental  sentiment  of  piety.  ^  This  sentiment 
doubtless  existed  in  Israel  more  generally  than  at  first 
appears,  and  it  was  the  same  with  gratitude  toward 
God.  The  Israelites  always  referred  to  God  the  bless- 
ings that  they  enjoyed,  and  expressed  to  him  their 
gratitude  for  them.  This  appears  even  in  the  song  of 
Deborah,  Jud.  v.,  and  in  that  which  celebrates  the  de- 
liverance from  Egyptian  slavery,  Ex.  xv.  We  see  it 
later  in  the  numerous  psalms  of  thanksgiving  that  date 
from  all  periods  of  the  history  of  Israel.  A  people  that 
always  celebrated  thus  the  blessings  of  God  and  sang 
his  praises  experienced  a  high  degree  of  gratitude 
toward  God  and  love  for  him.  It  is  the  sentiment  of 
gratitude  to  which  document  A  so  early  appeals  to  in- 
duce Israel  faithfully  to  observe  the  covenant  and  the 
law  of  God. 2  But  Deuteronomy  most  of  all  seeks  to 
awaken  this  sentiment,  a  sentiment  which  shall  result 
in  faithfulness  toward  God,  through  the  remembrance 
of  his  blessings,^  and  his  love,*  the  source  of  his  bless- 

1  Ex.  XX.  6  ;  Isa.  Ivi.  6  ;  Iviii.  14  ;  Dan.  ix.  5  ;  Ps.  xviii.  1  ;  xxxi.  23  ; 
xxxvii.  4  ;  xcvii.  10  ;  cxlv.  20.  2  Ex.  xix.  4  ff.  ;  xx.  2  ff. 

3  i.  31  ;  iv.  32  ff.  ;  vi.  20  ff.  ;  viii.  6  ff.  ;  x.  20  ff. ;  xi.  1  ff. ;  xxix.  2  ff., 
9  ff.  *  iv.  37  ;  vii.  8  ;  x.  15  ;  xxiii.  5. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  15.    FAITHFULNESS.  177 

ings.  It  is  the  same  with  the  legal  fragment,  Lev. 
xvii.  -xxvi.  These  laws  often  add  to  the  other  motives 
for  faithfulness  this,  that  the  commands  which  are  to 
be  fulfilled  come  from  Jehovah,  i  Sometimes  the  more 
complete  formula  is :  "  I  am  Jehovah  your  God. "  2  This, 
without  doubt,  means  that  these  laws  emanate  from 
the  true  God  who  can  oversee  the  fulfilment  of  them, 
and  render  to  each  one  according  to  his  works.  But 
the  expression  "your  God  "  may  also  imply  the  idea  that 
Jehovah  is  the  master,  the  lord,  the  ruler  of  Israel,  and 
has  the  right  to  command  his  people  and  require  of  them 
obedience. 3  Finally,  it  may  signify  this:  I  am  your 
benefactor,  your  protector,  and  your  saviour;  you  owe 
me  faithful  obedience  out  of  gratitude  for  the  blessings 
that  I  have  granted  you,  and  especially  for  deliverance 
from  Egyptian  slavery,  that  first  and  peculiarly  remark- 
able blessing.^ 

If  love  for  God  and  gratitude  to  him  should  produce 
obedience  toward  God,  love  for  one's  neighbor  should 
result  in  the  faithful  fulfilment  of  one's  duties  toward 
that  neighbor.  Such  love  is  also  enjoined  in  the  Old 
Testament,  but  more  rarely.^  It  may  be  presupposed  in 
many  cases  like  love  to  God  himself.  Yet  it  is  more 
correct  to  say  that  the  Hebrew,  who  emphasizes  the 
absolute  sovereignty  of  God  and  represents  rules  of  con- 
duct as  emanating  directly  from  him,  generally  leaves 
in  the  background  secondary  motives  to  faithfulness, 

1  Lev.  xviii.  5  f.,  21  ;  xix.  12,  14,  16,  28,  30,  32,  37  ;  xx.  8 ;  xxi.  12 ; 
xxii.  2  f.  ;  viii.  30  f . ;  xxvi.  2. 

2  Lev.  xviii.  4,  30 ;  xix.  2  f .,  10,  25,  31,  34,  36  ;  etc. 

3  Lev.  XXV.  55.  4  Lev.  xix.  36  f. ;  xxii.  32  f. ;  xxv.  38. 

5  Lev.  xix.  18,  34  ;  Deut.  x.  19 ;  Hos.  iv.  1 ;  Mic.  vi.  8 ;  Zecli.  vii. 
9  ;  Prov.  x.  12  :  xvi.  6. 


178  THEOLOGY   OF   THjb   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

and  brings  to  the  front  only  this  prime  reason,  that  God 
has  spoken,  and  man  owes  him  obedience,  in  all  things. 
From  the  Israelitish  point  of  view  man  should  fulfil 
his  duties  to  his  neighbor,  as  all  others,  because  God 
commands  it.  It  appears  from  the  foregoing  that 
knowledge  of  God  and  faith  in  God  are  essential  ele- 
ments of  piety,  of  the  moral  and  religious  life  of  Israel. 
It  was,  of  course,  necessary  to  have  a  knowledge  of  the 
holiness,  the  righteousness,  and  the  judgments  of  God, 
as  well  as  of  his  love  and  his  blessings,  and  it  was 
necessary  to  believe,  in  order  to  be  moved  to  fear  and 
love  for  God,  to  gratitude  to  him,  and  in  consequence 
to  the  faithful  fulfilment  of  his  will.  Knowledge  of 
God  is  often  presupposed,  but  frequently  also  enjoined 
in  the  Old  Testament,  as  an  essential  qualification  of 
the  true  Israelite.^  It  is  the  same  with  faith  in  God.^ 
Unbelief  is  strongly  censured  and  severely  punished.^ 


§  16.    WORSHIP. 

The  fact  most  deserving  attention  is  the  strict  cen- 
tralization of  worship,  which  was  attained  in  our  period 
and  which  is  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  Deuteronomy. 

We  have  seen  that,  in  ancient  times,  the  Israelites 
could  rear  altars  and  offer  sacrifices  in  any  place,  that 

1  Hos.  iv.  1,6;  v.  4  ;  vi.  3,  6  ;  Isa.  xi.  9 ;  xix.  21  ;  lii.  6 ;  Jer.  ix. 
24 ;  xxii.  16 ;  xxiv.  7  ;  xxxi.  34  ;  etc. 

2  Gen.  XV.  6 ;  Hos.  ii.  7  ;  Mic.  vii.  7  ;  Xeli.  i.  7  ;  Zepli.  iii.  12  ;  Jer. 
xiv.  22  ;  xvii.  7 ;  xxxix.  18  ;  Isa.  vii.  9 ;  viii.  17  ;  x.  20  ;  xii.  2  ;  xxv. 
9  ;  xxvi.  3  f.,  8  ;  xxviii.  16  ;  xxx.  15,  18  ;  xl.  31 ;  xliii.  10  ;  etc. 

3  Num.  XX.  7-12  ;  Isa.  xxx.  1  ff.  ;  xxxi.  1  ff.  ;  Jer.  ii.  17-19,  36  f.  ; 
xvii.  5  f.  ;  Deut.  i.  32  ff.  ;  ix.  23  ;  2  Kings  vii.  14 ;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  18- 
21,  31. 


SECOND   PERIOD. — §  16.    WORSHIP.  179 

a  multiplicity  of  places  of  worship  was  perfectly  admis- 
sible, but  that,  nevertheless,  the  ark  of   the   covenant 
was  already  a  rallying-point  and  a  means  of  religious 
centralization  for  all  Israel.     What  afterward  contrib- 
uted  to   such   centralization  was    the   erection  of  the 
temple  at  Jerusalem.     It  is  easy  to  understand  that 
this  royal  and  central  temple,  with  its  stately  worship, 
would,  little  by  little,  eclipse  all  the  other  sanctuaries. 
The  worship  of  the  high-places,  however,  continued  yet 
a  long   time,  alongside   of   the   worship  at  Jerusalem. 
Other  circumstances  were  necessary  to  produce  in  this 
respect  a  radical  reform.      The  event  that  unquestiona- 
bly exercised  the  greatest  influence   in  this   direction 
was  the  overthrow  of  the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes. 
From  that  moment  the  people  Israel  found  themselves 
reduced  almost  to  the  single  tribe  of  Judah,  surround- 
ing  Jerusalem  and  its  temple.     Moreover,  the  multi- 
plicity of  places  of  worship  had  given  rise  to  a  multi- 
plicity of  gods ;  the  high-places  served  not  only  for  the 
worship  of  Jehovah,  they  had  become  seats  of  idolatry.  ^ 
This  fact  furnished  a  stronger  reason  for  opposing  the 
worship  of  high-places.      This  is  what  Hezekiah  under- 
took  to    do. 2     Nothing    indicates,    however,    that   his 
efforts  were  crowned  with  success.     It  was   different 
after  the  discovery  of  Deuteronomy,  or  the  legal  part 
of  it,  which  distinctly  identifies  the  worship  of  high- 
places  with  idolatry  and  for  the  first  time  requires  a 
strict  centralization  of  worship.^ 

1  Jer.  vii.  29  ff.  ;  xvii.  2  ;  xix.  5  ;  Ezek.  vi.  8  ff.,  13  ;  xx.  28  ff.  ;  Lev. 
xxvi.  30  ;  1  Kings  xi.  7  ;  xiv.  23  ;  2  Kings  xvii.  9  ff .  ;  xviii.  4 ;  xxi. 
3  ff.  ;  xxiii.  5,  13.  ^  2  Kings  xviii.  4. 

3  Chap.  xii.  ;  xiv.  22  ff.  ;  xv.  20 ;  xvi.  2,  5  ft.,  11,  15  ;  xvii.  8  ff.  ; 
xviii.  6  :  xxvi.  2. 


180  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAINIENT. 

This  legislation  led  Josiah  to  proceed  to  the  reform 
of  worship,  an  account  of  which  is  found  2  Kings  xxiii. 
It  is  this  legislation  also  under  the  influence  of  which 
the  editor  of  the  books  of  Kings,  after  having  consci- 
entiously recounted  how,  until  the  time  of  Hezekiah, 
the  most  faithful  kings  offered  sacrifices  on  the  high- 
places,  feels  the  need  of  repeatedly  expressing  his  regret 
that  it  had  been  so.^  Idolatry,  however,  once  more 
uplifted  its  head  after  Josiah;  for  we  read  that  his  suc- 
cessors did  that  which  was  evil  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah, '-^ 
which  certainly  means  that  they  devoted  themselves  to 
unlawful  worship  and  to  idolatry.  Jeremiah  and  Eze- 
kiel  reproach  Israel  with  their  idolatry,  past  and  pres- 
ent, more  than  any  of  the  other  prophets.  Lev.  xvii. 
also,  which  was  written  during  or  a  little  after  the 
Exile,  reinforces  the  Deuteronomic  legislation  respect- 
ing the  centralization  of  worship.  This  chapter  forbids 
under  pain  of  death,  not  only  the  offering  of  sacrifices, 
but  even  the  slaughtering  of  animals  for  ordinary  use, 
elsewhere  than  at  the  lawful  sanctuary.  Though  regu- 
lations of  this  sort  favored  Jewish  Levitism  beyond 
measure,  they  were  justified  by  the  circumstances  that 
provoked  them ;  for  they  were  directed  against  idolatry, 
which  seemed  indestructible,  and  against  which  it  was 
necessary  finally  to  take  serious  precautions  and  direct" 
the  most  energetic  measures. 

The  death-blow  was  not,  however,  given  to  idolatry 
and  the  worship  at  the  high-places  until  the  grand 
catastrophe  of  the  Exile.  Not  until  after  the  return 
from  captivity  was  the  absolute  centralization  of  wor- 

1  1  Kings  iii.  2  f. ;  xv.  14  ;  xxii.  44  ;  2  Kings  xii.  3  ;  xiv.  4  ;  xv.  4, 
35  ;  xvi.  4.  ?  2  Kings  xxiii.  32,  37  ;  xxiv.  9,  19. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  16.    WORSHIP.  181 

ship  put  into  practice  in  a  decisive  fashion  among  the 
Jewish  people.  The  circumstances  were  then  peculiarly 
favorable.  The  Jews,  returned  to  their  country,  were 
few  in  number;  they  were,  therefore,  able  to  cluster 
more  closely  about  Jerusalem  and  its  restored  temple. 
The  Exile  had,  moreover,  caused  an  interruption  of  at 
least  half  a  century  in  traditional  usages,  and  it  was 
represented  by  the  prophets  as  the  consequence  and  just 
penalty  of  long-continued  idolatry. 

With  the  necessity  of  a  strict  centralization  of  wor- 
ship arose  that  of  a  centralization  of  the  sacerdotal 
functions.  This  was  likewise  for  the  first  time  ordained 
in  Deuteronomy,  being  itself  also  inspired  by  the  desire 
to  put  an  end  to  idolatry  and  to  the  abuses  to  which  the 
freedom  of  early  times  had  given  occasion. 

While  formerly  every  father  of  a  family  had  the  right 
to  fulfil  the  sacerdotal  functions,  and  those  who  devoted 
themselves  exclusively  to  these  functions  could  be  taken 
from  it  mattered  not  what  tribe,  Deuteronomy  assigns 
the  priesthood  to  the  tribe  of  Levi  alone ;  it  excludes, 
therefore,  any  one  who  does  not  belong  to  this  tribe ; 
according  to  it  all  the  sons  of  Levi  are  consecrated  to 
the  priesthood,  and  every  priest  should  belong  to  the 
tribe  of  Levi,  or  be  a  Levitical  priest.^  It  is  evident 
that  Levitical  priests  are  contrasted  with  priests  taken 
indiscriminately  from  the  mass  of  the  people. ^ 

Comparing  verse  25  with  verse  9  of  chapter  xxi.,  we 
are  convinced  beyond  a  peradventure  that  in  this  book 
the  term  Levite  is  synonymous  with  Levitical  priest. 
It  is  the  same  with  Jer.  xxxiii.  18,  21  f.     This  language 

1  xvii.  9,  18  ;  xviii.  1  ;  xxi.  5  ;  xxiv.  8  ;  xxyii.  9 ;  xxxi.  9. 

2  1  Kings  xii,  31  ;  xiii,  33  :  2  Kings  xvii.  32. 


182  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

respecting  the  Levitical  priests  continues  to  be  used  by 
the  prophets  of  the  Exile  ^  and  even  into  Chronicles. ^ 
In  fact,  as  we  shall  see  farther  on,  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  priests  and  the  Levites  did  not  begin  to  be 
made  until  during  and  after  the  Exile. 

According  to  Deuteronomy  all  the  Levites  are  priests ; 
moreover,  they  are  all  priests  of  the  same  rank.  There 
is  to  be  found  in  it  no  more  trace  of  a  sacerdotal  hier- 
archy such  as  that  with  which  we  later  become  ac- 
quainted, than  in  the  most  ancient  documents.  Before 
the  Exile,  the  distinction  between  priests  and  Levites 
being  entirely  ignored,  the  term  Levite  was  the  hono- 
rary title  of  the  priest.  In  all  the  ancient  literature  we 
find  only  two  passages  that  indicate  a  different  stand- 
point; they  are  2  Sam.  xv.  24  and  1  Kings  viii.  4;  but 
a  comparison  of  2  Chron.  v.  5  with  the  second  of  these 
passages  clearly  proves  that  these  two  passages  have 
been  modified  in  accordance  with  the  later  standpoint. ^ 
In  fact,  the  entire  sacerdotal  hierarchy  as  it  existed 
before  the  Exile  and  after  the  time  of  King  Joash  con- 
sisted of  a  high-priest  and  subordinate  priests  with 
door-keepers  to  the  temple,*  which  last,  however,  were 
also  priests.^  From  ancient  times  there  were  perhaps 
a  head-priest  and  subordinate  employes  at  each  of  the 
various  places  of  worship  of  any  importance.  It  is 
probable  that  the  kings,  who,  after  the  time  of  David, 
had  the  upper  hand  in   affairs   ecclesiastical,  for   the 

1  Ezek.  xliii.  19  ;  xliv.  15 ;  Isa.  Ixvi.  21. 

2  2  Chron.  v.  5 ;  xxiii.  18  ;  xxx.  27. 

3  Wellhausen,  History^  pp.  43,  141  f. 

4  2  Kings  xii.  10  ;  xxii.  4,  8  ;  xxiii.  4  ;  xxv.  18  ;  comp.  Jer.  lii.  24  ; 
XX.  1  ;  xxix,  26,  ^  2  Kings  xii.  9. 


SECOND    PERIOD.  —  §   16.    WOKSHIP.  183 

better  conduct  of  the  service  of  God  established  a  kind 
of  sacerdotal  hierarchy  at  Jerusalem.  But  such  an 
organization  does  not  resemble  the  sacerdotal  hierarchy 
of  document  C,  to  which  we  shall  refer  hereafter;  it 
cannot  have  had  any  religious  value  or  have  been  re- 
garded as  emanating  from  God,  otherwise  the  silence 
observed  by  Deuteronomy  and  Ezekiel  on  the  subject  of 
the  sovereign  pontificate,  though  they  are  relatively 
explicit  with  reference  to  the  priesthood,  could  not  well 
be  explained.  Not  until  after  the  Exile,  when  the  king, 
heretofore  the  summus  episcopus  in  Israel,  had  disap- 
peared, did  the  high-priest  begin  to  play  a  considerable 
part.  ^ 

Except  in  the  two  respects  of  which  we  have  just 
spoken,  our  period  presents  nothing  worthy  of  especial 
attention  concerning  worship.  We  must,  however, 
describe  the  attitude  of  the  prophets  with  regard  to  the 
traditional  institutions  and  ceremonies  of  their  relig- 
ion. This  attitude  is  not  hostile,  as  has  been  claimed. 
The  truth  is,  rather,  that  the  prophets,  without  despising 
external  worship,  ascribed  to  the  religious  and  moral 
life  the  balance  of  importance.  As  Oehler  very  justly 
observes,  "the  program  of  prophetism"  is  indicated, 
1  Sam.  XV.  22,  in  these  words :  "  Obedience  is  of  more 
value  than  sacrifices,  and  observance  of  the  word  of 
Jehovah  than  the  fat  of  rams."  This  program  is  de- 
veloped in  a  series  of  passages  ^  in  which  the  prophets 
place  above  religious  ceremonies,  feasts,  sacrifices,  fasts, 

1  Hag.  i.  1,  12  ;  ii.  2,  4  ;  Zech.  iii.  1  ff. ;  vi.  11  ff. 

2  Amos  V.  21-24  ;  Hos.  iv.  1  fE.  ;  vi.  6  ;  Mic.  vi.  6-8  ;  Isa.  i.  11-17  ; 
Iviii.  3  ff. ;  Jer.  vi.  19  f.  ;  vii.  1  ff.,  9  ff.,  21  ff. ;  Zech.  vii.  4-10  ;  Ps.  xl. 
6  ff. ;  1.  7  ff.,  16  ff. 


184      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

etc.,  the  knowledge  of  God,  honesty,  righteousness, 
charity,  or  amendment  in  heart  and  life  after  unfaith- 
fulness. 

Jer.  vii.  22  f.  is  a  classic  passage  as  regards  the  ques- 
tion under  discussion.  The  prophet  there  declares  that 
Jehovah  gave  the  fathers  no  command  on  the  subject 
of  burnt  offerings  and  sacrifices,  that  he  simply  com- 
manded them  to  walk  in  all  his  ways.  In  other  words, 
the  sacrifices  are  not  of  divine  institution,  only  the 
moral  regulations.  This  agrees  with  1  Sam.  xv.  22, 
where  obedience  and  observance  of  the  word  of  Jeho- 
vah are  contrasted  with  sacrifices,  whicli^consequently, 
are  not  based  on  the  word,  the  command,  the  initiative, 
of  God.i  The  prophets  never  see  in  the  neglect  of  any 
ceremony  anything  blameworthy;  it  is  only  transgres- 
sion of  the  moral  law  and  idolatry  that  they  condemn. 
To  rites  in  themselves  they  ascribe  comparatively  little 
value;  for  them  the  important  thing  is  that  every 
act  of  worship  be  performed  exclusively  in  honor  of 
Jehovah. 

We  see,  however,  in  Jeremiah  for  instance,  that 
though  the  prophets  placed  the  moral  above  the  cere- 
monial law,  they  did  not  mean  to  reject  or  abolish 
the  latter.  Jeremiah  promises  that  the  sacrifices  and 
the  priesthood  shall  never  fail  in  Israel,  even  under  the 
reign  of  the  Messiah. ^  The  prophets,  then,  simply 
oppose  the  abuse  of  rites,  and  not  the  rites  themselves ; 
they  try  to  teach  that  external  rites  cannot  take  the 
place  of  sentiments  and  acts  of  faithfulness  toward  God 
and  one's  fellows. 

1  Comp.  Hos.  vi.  6  ;  Isa.  i.  11  ff.  ;  xxix.  13 ;  Mic.  vi.  6-8. 

2  Jer.  xxxiii.  18  ;  xvii.  26, 


SECOND  PERIOD.  -—  §  17.    ESSENCE   OF   SIN.         185 

That  prophetism  before  the  Exile,  so  far  fi^om  com- 
pletely rejecting  external  worship,  ascribed  to  it  a 
degree  of  value,  is,  moreover,  proven  from  Deuteron- 
omy, which,  though  written  under  its  influence,  finds 
plenty  of  room  for  all  that  concerns  worship,  the  place 
of  worship,  the  priesthood,  the  religious  feasts,  Leviti- 
cal  purity,  and  other  subjects  of  the  same  nature. 

What  we  have  said,  therefore,  applies  more  especially 
to  the  earlier  prophets  up  to  the  time  of  Jeremiah. 
In  the  next  period  we  shall  see  that,  beginning  with 
Ezekiel,  external  worship  gained  so  much  in  impor- 
tance that  the  prophets  themselves  yielded,  in  respect 
to  it,  to  the  influence  of  Levitism,  which  finally  degen- 
erated more  and  more  into  formalism  and  Pharisaism. 

§  17.     ISEAEL'S   UNPAITHFULNESS  AND  THE  ESSENCE 

OF  SIN. 

We  come  now  to  the  subject  of  sin.  We  should, 
hoAvever,  proceed  in  a  manner  contrary  to  the  spirit  of 
the  Old  Testament  and  especially  of  prophetism,  if  we 
began  by  treating  this  subject  from  a  purely  abstract 
standpoint.  Here,  again,  the  prophets  avoided  all  spec- 
ulation. They  set  out  from  concrete  facts ;  they  allowed 
themselves  to  be  guided  by  experience;  and  they  had 
in  view  only  a  practical  end.  Nearly  all  the  prophets 
begin  by  reproaching  their  people  with  numerous 
breaches  of  faithfulness,  to  which  they  attach  the  threat 
of  severe  punishments. 

We  shall  not,  of  course,  here  give  a  catalogue  of  all 
the  sins  with  which  Israel  are  reproached  in  the  various 
prophetical  and  historical  books.     It  is  only  necessary 


186      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

to  read  the  book  of  Judges  or  the  books  of  Kings,  Amos, 
and  Hosea,  Isaiah  and  Micah,  or  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel, 
to  find  that  it  is  ahnost  always,  in  substance,  the  same 
transgressions  that  are  noticed.     In  the  historical  and 

^  the  prophetical  books,  the  sin  that  is  oftenest  mentioned 
and  that  is  reckoned  most  serious  is  the  constantly 
reviving  idolatry  by  which  Israel  broke  the  covenant 
with  Jehovah.  Along  with  this  chief  sin,  transgres- 
sion of  the  first  of  the  ten  commandments,  the  prophets 
very  often  mention  the  sins  against  one's  neighbor  that 
are  condemned  by  the  second  table  of  the  decalogue,  — 
murder,  theft,  adultery,  false  testimony.  Amos  thus 
early  reproaches  the  Israelites  with  being  wanting  in 
justice  and  equity,  despising  rectitude  for  the  sake  of 
presents,  leading  licentious  lives,  oppressing  the  lowly, 
the  needy,  devoting  themselves  in  their  cupidity  to  un- 
just traffic,  trusting  in  their  own  power;  and  most  of 
these  charges  appear  in  the  other  prophets.  Another 
form  of  unfaithfulness  with  which  Israel  are  often  re- 
proached is  that  of  putting  their  trust  in  their  power- 
ful neighbors  and  seeking  alliance  with  them  instead 
of  trusting  in  God. 

What  interests  us  more  than  a  complete  and  detailed 
catalogue  of  the  forms  of  Israel's  unfaithfulness,  is  the 
dominant  idea  of  sin,  the  principle  unifying  its  diverse 

J  manifestations.  According  to  the  Old  Testament,  he 
who  sins  sins  against  God.^  This  is  what  forms  the 
essence  of  sin,  and  what  gives  to  the  idea  of  sin  its 

1  Gen.  xiii.  13  ;  xx.  6  ;  xxxix.  9  ;  Ex.  x.  16  ;  xxxii.  33  ;  Lev.  v.  19  ; 
Num.  XV.  30  ;  Deut.  i.  41 ;  1  Sam.  vii.  6 ;  xiv.  33 ;  2  Sam.  xii.  13 ; 
2  Chron.  xix.  10 ;  xxviii.  10,  13  ;  Ps.  li.  4 ;  Jer.  xiv.  7,  20  ;  xvi.  10  ;  Isa. 
xlii.  24 ;  etc. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  17.   ESSENCE   OF   SIN.        187 

peculiar  depth  and  gravity.  The  Israelite  saw  in  sin 
an  offence  against  God,  because  he  saw  in  it  a  trans- 
gression of  the  divine  will,  which  should  serve  man  as 
a  rule  of  conduct.  Man  should  be  familiar  with  the 
will  of  God  since  God  has  revealed  it  to  him ;  Israel  in 
particular  know  it  perfectly  through  the  law  and  the 
prophets.  The  legislation  of  the  Pentateuch  takes 
account  of  the  least  details  of  life,  and  represents  all 
the  laws  and  ordinances  as  so  many  commands  of  God. 
In  this  way  all  life,  national  and  individual,  public 
and  private,  civil  and  religious,  was  regulated,  and  very 
minutely,  by  God  himself.  Not  to  obey  these  laws 
was  to  transgress  the  will  of  God,  to  sin  against  him. 
The  fall  of  Adam  itself  is  represented  as  a  transgres- 
sion of  a  formal  command  of  God,  an  act  of  disobedi- 
ence toward  God.  This  is  the  way  in  which  sin  is 
represented  everywhere  in  the  Old  Testament. 

The  application  that  is  here  made  of  this  way  of 
thinking  may  perhaps  be  found  far  from  perfect.  It  is 
none  the  less  true,  however,  that  this  will  always  be 
the  fundamental  principle  of  all  healthy  piety,  of  all 
truly  religious  morality.  The  Israelites  may  have 
fallen  into  all  sorts  of  errors  concerning  sin ;  they  may 
have  regarded  as  sins  what  we  do  not  consider  such ; 
they  may  have  had  scruples  about  matters  that  seem  to 
us  perfectly  indifferent,  like  the  distinction  between 
clean  and  unclean  foods ;  they  may  not  have  regarded  as 
sins  what  we  consider  such,  e.g,  the  complete  extermina- 
tion of  hostile  peoples ;  but  it  will  never  be  possible  / 
from  the  religious  standpoint  to  form  a  better  concep- 
tion than  they  did  of  the  essence  of  sin. 

Since  the  law,  the  expression  of  the  will  of  God,  reg- 


188      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

ulatecl  in  the  main  only  external  acts,  sin  was  con- 
ceived of  in  a  way  somewhat  superficial  and  external.  It 
must,  however,  be  admitted  that  it  was  not  made  to 
consist  solely  in  external  transgressions,  but  also  in 
internal  dispositions.  The  decalogue  itself  forbids  evil 
desires  along  with  evil  acts  and  words. ^  That  they 
went  to  the  very  source  of  sin,  to  the  internal  disposi- 
tions, is  also  proven  by  the  fact  that  they  insist,  as  we 
shall  see  later  on,  upon  the  necessity  of  the  regenera- 
tion of  the  heart  as  a  preparation  for  doing  the  will  of 
God.  Schultz,  however,  remarks  that  from  ancient 
times  there  did  not  exist  ideas  so  sound  and  correct; 
that  sin  was  first  conceived  of  in  a  more  superficial 
manner,  as  simple  disregard  of  the  religious  and  civil 
practices  of  Israel ;  and  that  prophetism  alone  rose  to  a 
higher  standpoint. ^  This  is  perfectly  correct  and  alto- 
gether natural.  The  child  has  only  a  superficial  idea 
of  sin.  It  is  the  same  with  peoples  in  the  stage  of  in- 
fancy. Now  Israel  passed  through  infancy  before  reach- 
ing manhood.  When  we  compare  the  legislation  of 
Deuteronomy  with  that  of  document  A,  we  notice  a 
very  perceptible  progress  in  this  regard,  for  the  latter 
insists  much  less  on  internal  dispositions  than  the 
former.  So  also  it  is  the  prophets  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel, 
and  deutero-Isaiah,  who,  more  than  the  earlier  pro- 
J  phets,  proclaim  the  necessity  of  the  regeneration  of 
the  heart.  The  book  of  Judges  and  those  of  Samuel 
bear  witness  to  very  rude  morals ;  they  describe  acts  of 
barbarity  which  do  not,  however,  seem  to  have  been 
regarded  as  blameworthy.  Prophets  like  Samuel  and 
Elijah   cause   to   be  executed,  or  themselves   execute, 

1  Ex.  XX.  17.  2  n.  281  f. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  18.    THE   EXTENT   OF   SIN.       189 

horrible  massacres.  It  is  evident  that,  under  ancient 
prophetism,  moral  ideas,  notions  of  good  and  evil,  were 
still  very  imperfect,  and  that  therefore  the  idea  of  sin 
was  more  superficial  than  it  finally  became. 


§  18.     THE  EXTENT   OF   SIN. 

A  series  of  passages  assert  that  sin  is  universal,  that 
it  extends  to  all  men.^  Some  teach  that  man  is  a  sinner 
from  his  youth  or  from  his  birth. ^  How,  in  fact,  could 
anything  clean  be  born  of  an  unclean  person?^ 

History,  as  it  is  recounted  in  the  Old  Testament, 
also  tends  to  establish  the  universality  of  sin.  It  shows 
that  man  sinned,  and  that  immediately  after  his  crea- 
tion ;  that  his  descendants  sinned  to  such  a  degree  as 
to  bring  the  deluge  upon  the  whole  human  race;  that 
after  this  chastisement  men  began  to  sin  again,  as  is 
proven  by  the  erection  of  the  Tower  of  Babel  and  the 
destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  The  patriarchs 
were  not  free  from  faults.  And  the  entire  history  of 
the  people  Israel  is  largely  but  a  recital  of  their  re- 
peated lapses  from  faithfulness,  from  the  desert  to  the 
Exile.  As  for  the  heathen  peoples,  they  are  generally 
represented  as  enemies  of  God. 

Nevertheless,  certain  passages  might  lead  one  to  be- 
lieve that  the  Old  Testament  admits  exceptions  to  the 
general  rule.  Alongside  of  wicked  Cain  we  find  pious 
Abel.*     Farther  on  reference  is  made  to  Enoch,  who 

1  1  Kings  viii.  46  ;  Job  iv.  17-19  ;  xiv.  4  ;  xv.  14-16  ;  Ps.  xiv.  1-3  ; 
liii.  1-3  ;  cxvi.  11 ;  cxliii.  2  ;  Pro  v.  xx.  9  ;  Eccl.  vii.  20. 

2  Gen.  viii.  21 ;  Ps.  li.  5  ;  Iviii.  3  ;  comp.  Isa.  xlviii.  8. 

3  Job  xiv.  4  ;  XV.  14.  -^  Gen.  iv. 


190      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

walked  with  Gocl.^  Noah  also,  in  spite  of  the  general 
corruption,  remained  righteous. ^  The  biblical  narra- 
tives accuse  Abraham  and  Joseph  of  no  faults ;  for  what 
might  seem  to  us  blameworthy  or  immoral  was  probably 
not  so  in  the  eyes  of  the  sacred  authors.  Abraham 
furnishes  a  striking  contrast  to  the  perversity  of  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah,  and  Joseph  to  the  wickedness  of  his 
brothers.  Job  is  called  an  upright,  righteous  man, 
fearing  God  and  shunning  evil.^  There  are  psalmists 
who  call  themselves  righteous,  innocent,  pure.^  Many 
passages,  especially  in  the  Psalms,  mention  numerous 
righteous  persons. 

Does  the  Old  Testament  really  admit  exceptions  to 
the  universality  of  sin?  This  is  not  impossible,  since 
the  natural  corruption  of  man  is  not  so  strongly  empha- 
sized in  it  as  in  the  New  Testament,  and  since,  on  the 
other  hand,  human  freedom  is  clearly  recognized.  Why 
might  not  certain  men  have  made  a  good  use  of  their 
freedom  and  have  been  preserved  from  evil?  Once 
more,  it  is  admissible  from  the  standpoint  of  the  Old 
Testament;  for  all  the  books  do  not  assert,  as  some 
passages  do,  that  there  is  no  one  who  is  righteous,  not 
even  one.  Nothing,  however,  on  the  other  hand,  in- 
dicates that  the  righteousness  attributed  to  some  men 
is  perfect.  It  is  possible  that  in  all  these  cases  the 
sacred  authors  meant  to  speak  only  of  a  relative  right- 
eousness. David,  for  example,  is  often  represented  as 
the  righteous  man  par  excellence,  for  love  of  whom  God 
many  times  blessed  or  preserved  from  deserved  penal- 
ties his  unworthy  successors,  the  model  theocratic  king 

1  Gen.  V.  22.  2  Qen.  vi.  9  ;  vii.  1.  3  job  i.  1,  8 ;  ii.  3. 

*  Ps.  vii.  8  ;  xviii.  20  ff.  ;  comp.  Job.  xxii.  30. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  18.    THE   EXTENT   OF   SIN.      191 

who  is  the  type  of  the  Messiah,  —  and  in  spite  of  this 
the  Old  Testament  places  to  his  account  crimes  that  it 
represents  as  such.  Moses  also,  be  it  remembered,  who 
is,  nevertheless,  exalted  above  all  the  other  prophets,^ 
committed,  according  to  the  biblical  narratives,  faults 
so  grave  that  he  was  not  permitted  to  enter  the  land  of 
Canaan.  Isaiah,  who  surely  reckoned  himself  among 
the  righteous,  declares  that  he  has  unclean  lips.^  Doc- 
ument C  ordains  that  all  Israel,  the  priest  and  the  high- 
priest  included,  must  needs  be  purified  once  a  year.^ 
Finally,  that  the  Old  Testament  attributes  to  certain 
men  righteousness  and  uprightness,  apparently  in  an 
absolute,  but  really  in  a  relative  sense,  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  these  qualities  are,  as  we  have  seen,  actually 
attributed  to  Job  in  the  former  sense,  and  that  the  same 
book  then  categorically  asserts  that  there  is  not  a  single 
man  who  is  perfectly  clean,*  and  that  Job  himself  is 
not.^  The  author  of  Ps.  xxxii.  unquestionably  ranks 
himself  among  the  righteous  men  of  whom  he  speaks, 
V.  11,  and  yet  in  the  last  verses  he  confesses  his  sins. 
The  same  thing  is  found  elsewhere.^ 

It  may  be  well  to  recall  here  what  we  have  already 
observed,  viz.  that  in  the  Old  Testament  righteousness 
is  very  often  synonymous  with  piety.  The  righteous, 
therefore,  as  contrasted  with  the  unfaithful  and  impious, 
are  the  faithful  in  the  entirely  relative  sense  that  we 
give  to  this  term,  when  we  use  it  to  designate  sincere 
and  active  Christians,  in  contrast  with  doubtful  Chris- 
tians or  irreligious  people. 

1  Num.  xii.  6-8  ;  Deut.  xxxiv.  10-12.  2  jga.  yi.  5. 

3  Lev.  xvi.  4  Job  xiv.  4  ;  xv.  14-16. 

6  Job  xiii.  26 ;  x.  14  ;  vii.  21.     ^  pg.  xl.  7-12  ;  comp.  xli.  4  with  v.  12. 


192      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

§  19.     THE  OEIGIN   OP  SIN. 

Whence  comes  it  that  all  men  are  sinners  ?  Are  they 
so  naturally,  by  virtue  of  their  constitution,  or  as  the 
result  of  a  change  in  their  original  nature  ?  This  ques- 
tion deserves  our  attention  the  more  because  Jewish 
and  Christian  theology  have  claimed  to  find  the  doctrine 
of  the  Fall  in  the  Old  Testament. 

Let  us  begin  with  the  consideration  of  Gen.  ii.  and 
iii.,  where  the  explanation  of  the  origin  of  sin  has  gen- 
erally been  sought.  Of  the  entire  canonical  literature 
of  Israel  these  two  chapters  alone  tell  us  of  a  primitive 
state  of  man  preceding  the  entrance  of  sin  into  the 
world.  It  is,  therefore,  fair  to  conclude  that  the  Isra- 
elites did  not  give  great  attention  to  this  question. 
Hope  for  the  future,  not  regret  for  the  past,  is  the  domi- 
nant note  of  the  religion  of  Israel.  What  a  difference 
between  the  idea  of  the  Fall  and  the  Messianic  hope! 
The  latter  plays  a  leading  part  in  the  literature  of  the 
Old  Testament  ;  the  former  is  mentioned  therein  but 
once.  We  must,  however,  examine  this  story  more 
closely,  both  on  account  of  the  importance  that  has 
been  attributed  to  it  and  on  account  of  the  false  inter- 
pretations that  have  been  given  to  it.  But  let  us  as 
far  as  possible  lay  aside  these  interpretations  and  all 
dogmatic  contrivances,  that  we  may  grasp  the  content 
of  the  stor}^  in  all  its  purity. 

We  remark  first  of  all  that  our  story  does  not  confine 

itself  to  a  description  of  the  primitive  condition  of  the 

first  human  pair.     After  having  referred  to  the  creation 

of  woman  .and  the  institution  of  marriage,  ^  the  fiuthor 

1  Gen.  ii.  22  ff. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  — §  19.    THE   ORIGIN   OF    SIN.      193 

proceeds  immediately  to  the  account  of  the  Fall.i     We 
shall  imitate  his  example,  not  dwelling  on  the  original 
condition  of  man,  about  which  we  are  not  able  to  say 
much,  but  regarding  it  chiefly  in  its  relation  to  the  Fall. 
When  we  enter  into  the  details,  we  are  struck  with 
the  analogy  that  exists,  on  the  one  hand,  between  the 
innocent  condition  of  the  first  man  and  childhood,  on 
the  other,  between  his  sinful  condition  after  the  Fall 
and  the  age  of  accountability.     What  is  the  primitive 
condition  of  Adam  and  Eve?     They  live  in  a  magnifi- 
cent garden,  without  care  or  toil,  eating  the  fruite  of 
the  trees,2  and  they  are  naked,  but  without  being  more 
ashamed  than  a  child  of  their  nakedness ;  3  they  do  not 
know  how  to  distinguish  good  from  evil,*  another  char- 
acteristic of   childhood, 5   or   of   old   age  when    it   has 
reached  a  second  childhood.^     The  first  effect  of  the 
Fall  is  the  feeling  of  shame:  the  eyes  of  Adam  and  Eve 
are  opened,  they  see  that  they  are  naked,  and  they  make 
themselves  girdles."     This,  Umbreit  says,  is  meant  to 
suggest  in  a  subtle  and  delicate  manner  that  observa- 
tion of  the  distinction  of  sex  and  recognition  of  the 
woman  by  the  man  produce  the  condition  necessary  to 
reproduction  in  the  human  pair.^ 

Here,  then,  are  Adam  and  Eve  arrived  at  conscious 
maturity  and  puberty.  The  consequences  for  the  woman 
are  the  pains  of  pregnancy  and  childbirth,  as  well  as 
submission  to  her  husband  ;9  she  now  has  a  right  to  the 
title  Eve  (life)  having  become  the  mother  of  the  living,  lo 
As  for  man,  he  is  condemned  to  the  laborious  cultiva- 

1  Chap.  iii.         2  Gen.  ii.  16.        3  Gen.  ii.  25.  *  Gen.  iii.  5. 

s  Deut.  i.  39 ;  Isa.  vii.  15  f.         ^2  Sam.  xix.  35.  <  Gen.  iii.  7. 

8  Die  Sunde,  pp.  21  f.  9  Gen.  iii.  16.  lo  Gen.  iii.  20. 


194      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

tion  of  an  unresponsive  soil  all  his  life.^  They  both 
attain  superior  knowledge,  the  knowledge  of  good  and 
evil,  which  is  the  prerogative  of  divinity, ^  and  they  are 
driven  from  paradise  forever.^  It  is  clear  that  the  sacred 
author  had  in  view  the  two  principal  stages  of  human 
life,  childhood  and  the  age  of  accountability,  in  describ- 
ing the  original  condition  of  man  and  his  situation  after 
the  Fall. 

Let  us  complete  this  picture  by  adding  some  new 
touches.  Among  the  trees  of  paradise  is  the  tree  of 
life;^  man  could  at  first  eat  freely  of  its  fruit  ;^  but 
after  the  fall  he  is  forbidden  it  lest  he  should  live  for- 
ever.^ God  had  forbidden  man  to  eat  of  the  tree  of 
knowledge  of  good  and  evil  under  penalty  of  death ;  "> 
he  did  not  wish  that  he  should  attain  to  such  knowl- 
edge,^ but  that  he  should  remain  under  his  tutelage.  He 
punishes  him  with  death  and  all  the  ills  of  life  for 
having  disobeyed  his  command. 

The  thought  of  our  author,  then,  is  this :  man  when 
created  by  God  was  as  innocent  as  a  child  and  as  happy 
withal;  God  wished  that  he  should  remain  in  this  con- 
dition of  childish  dependence  and  simplicity,  exempt 
from  the  cares  and  sufferings  of  life ;  but  man  preferred 
to  eat  of  the  forbidden  fruit  and  attain  higher  knowledge ; 
thus  God's  original  plan  was  disturbed  and  replaced  by 
the  present  state  of  things,  in  which  man  is  more  intel- 
ligent but  less  happy.  As  for  the  chief  object  of  the 
story,  it  is  to  show  the  origin,  not  of  sin,  moral  evil, 
but  of  physical  evil,  the  ills  of  life,  and  to  prove  that 

1  Gen.  iii.  17-19,  23.  2  Gen.  iii.  5,  22  ;  comp.  2  Sam.  xiv.  17. 

8  Gen.  iii.  2.S  f.  *  Gen.  ii.  9.  s  Qen.  ii.  16. 

6  Gen.  iii.  22,  24.  '  Gen.  ii.  17  ;  iii.  3.  »  Qen.  iii.  22. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  — §  19.    THE   ORIGIN   OF   SIN.      195 

not  God,  but  human  sin,  is  the  cause  of  these  evils. ^ 
Bruch  justly  remarks  that  the  author  of  our  story 
allowed  himself  to  be  guided  by  the  twofold  thought 
that  physical  evil  is  the  result  of  sin,  and  that  sin  is 
connected  with  civilization ;  and  that  he  derived  these 
ideas  from  memory  and  observation,  which  tell  us  that 
the  child  is  happy  so  long  as  he  remains  in  the  condi- 
tion of  ignorance  and  innocence,  Avhile  the  develop- 
ment of  the  spirit  and  of  life  produces  disordered 
instincts  and  desires  that  engender  most  evils. ^ 

The  questions  whence  sin  came  and  how  man,  com- 
ing from  the  hands  of  the  Creator,  could  fall  into  sin, 
seem  not  to  have  existed  for  our  author.  The  Old 
Testament  as  a  whole  attributes  to  man  freedom  to 
choose  between  good  and  evil.  Our  author  also  attrib- 
uted the  same  freedom  to  the  protoplasts ;  this  is  clear 
from  what  he  says  of  them.  Hence  it  could  not  occur 
to  him  to  explain  the  origin  of  sin,  the  possibility  of 
sinning  being  implied  in  the  freedom  of  man.  The 
transition  from  the  possibility  of  sin  to  its  realization 
was,  moreover,  favored  by  the  external  circumstances 
in  which  God  had  placed  man.  It  was  God,  in  fact, 
who  had  planted  in  the  midst  of  the  Garden  of  Eden 
the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil.  It  was  he  who 
had  created  the  serpent  and  permitted  him  to  stay  in 
paradise.^  The  account  of  the  Fall  describes  simply  the 
starting-point  of  sin  in  the  human  bosom.  In  this 
sense  it  may  be  said  to  explain  the  origin  of  sin,  but  not 
in  that  of  revealing  its  source  or  primal  cause.     It  does 

1  Rothe,  Dogmatik,  I.  pp.  302  f. 

2  Weisheitslehre  der  Hebrder,  pp.  92  f. ;  [Wellhausen,  History,  pp. 
300  ff.J.  3  Gen.  iii.  1. 


196  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

not  reach  this  cause.  It  confines  itself  to  the  external 
circumstances  which  furnished  our  first  parents  with  an 
occasion  for  sin,  by  summoning  them  to  make  use  of 
their  freedom. 

What  our  author  wished  least  of  all  to  explain, 
though  the  contrary  has  been  asserted,  is  the  origin  of 
the  innate  inclination  to  evil.  On  the  one  hand,  he 
grants  the  existence  of  this  inclination  even  in  Adam 
and  Eve,  so  readily  do  they  yield  to  the  solicitations  of 
the  serpent;  he  seems  to  find  it  perfectly  natural  that 
the  woman  should  have  coveted  the  forbidden  fruit  after 
the  serpent  had  induced  her  to  eat  of  it.^  On  the  other 
hand,  he  considers  Cain  as  free  as  his  father  before  the 
Fall  and  perfectly  capable  of  repelling  evil.^  The  only 
change  produced  by  the  Fall  affects  man's  knowledge, 
in  which  respect  he  has  gained  much,  since  discernment 
between  good  and  evil  was  a  great  advance ;  ^  it  affects, 
moreover,  the  external  condition  of  man,  who  has  lost 
much,  in  that,  having  at  first  been  happy,  he  has  be- 
come miserable.  As  for  moral  power,  as  we  have  just 
seen,  it  has  not  been  changed  in  the  least.*  Nor  does 
the  Old  Testament  as  a  whole  say  more  than  this  story 
about  a  change  produced  in  the  moral  nature  of  man  as 
a  result  of  Adam's  sin,  since  outside  of  this  story  there 
is  never  any  reference  to  the  fall  of  Adam  or  a  fall  of 
humanity,  but  it  is  taken  for  granted  that  man  is  free 
to  do  good  and  shun  evil. 

This  is  doubtless  the  reason,  this  and  the  fact  of  its 
essential  practical  tendency,  why  prophetism  did  not 

1  Gen.  iii.  6.  2  Qen.  iv.  7. 

3  Gen.  iii.  5,  22  ;  2  Sam.  xiv.  17  ;  1  Kings  iii.  9. 
*  Comp.  Schultz,  II.  pp.  301  f. 


SECOND   PERIOD. —  §  20.    THE   GUILT   OF   SIN.      197 

feel  the  need  of  giving  attention  to  the  origin  of  sin. 
The  question  is  hardly  raised  except  in  the  book  of  Job. 
It  sees  the  cause  of  the  sinful  condition  of  man  in  his 
natural  weakness,  his  earthly  origin,  his  descent  from 
unclean  parents.^  Thus  even  in  this  comparatively 
speculative  and  theoretical  book  Israelitish  thought 
remains  essentially  empirical;  it  does  not  feel  the  need 
of  going  back  to  the  causes  or  first  and  metaphysical 
reasons  for  moral  evil. 

§  20.    THE  GUILT  OF  SIN. 

The  feeling  of  guilt  was  very  fully  developed  in 
Israel.  It  is  admirably  expressed  in  the  first  four  peni- 
tential psalms,^  and  in  many  another  passage.  Every- 
where in  the  Old  Testament  we  see  sinners  filled  with 
the  feeling  of  guilt  seeking  the  forgiveness  of  God. 
Since  moral  freedom  was  attributed  to  man,  his  respon- 
sibility, and  consequently,  in  case  of  unfaithfulness, 
his  guilt,  naturally  appeared  very  great.  Guilt  is  fre- 
quently designated  by  the  same  terms  as  sin  itself.  Yet 
the  Hebrew  language  also  has  a  peculiar  term  to  ex- 
press it;  viz.  asham  and  its  derivatives.^ 

The  Old  Testament  generally  represents  sin  as  a 
conscious  and  voluntary  transgression  of  the  will  of 
God;  but  it  teaches  that  man  is  also  guilty  and  should 
offer  a  guilt  offering  when  he  has  sinned  involuntaril}-, 
by  mistake  or  in  ignorance.*     Thus  it  appears  that  there 

1  iv.  17-19  ;  xiv.  1-4  ;  xv.  14  ;  xxv.  4-6  ;  comp.  Ps.  ciii.  12-14. 

2  vi.,  xxxii.,  xxxviii.,  li. 

3  Gen.  xxvi.  10 ;  xlii,  21 ;  2  Sam.  xiv.  13 ;  Hos.  v.  15 ;  xiii.  1  ; 
Zech.  xi.  5  ;  Ezek.  xxii.  4  ;  etc. 

*  Lev.  iv.,  V.  14-19 ;  Num.  xv.  22  ff.,  27  ff. 


198      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

is  guilt  every  time  the  divine  commands  have  been  vio- 
lated, Avhether  this  violation  has  been  intentional  or 
not,  and  that  even  in  the  latter  case  reparation  is  due 
to  the  sacred  majesty  of  God.  It  is  clear  that,  in  this 
view,  the  principle  in  accordance  with  which  God  takes 
note  of  the  heart,  the  intention,  is  not  sufficiently  pro- 
tected; that  more  importance  is  assigned  to  the  external 
act  than  to  the  internal  disposition.  But  it  should  be 
noticed  that  this  conception  appears  in  document  C,  in 
which  Levitical  purity  generally  much  outranks  moral 
purity.  It  is  a  fruit  of  Levitism,  not  of  prophetism. 
In  other  documents,  it  is  true,  we  encounter  passages 
which  allow  that  man  may  be  guilty  on  account  of  sins 
committed  by  his  ancestors,^  and  even  that  he  may  be 
punished  for  faults  of  others  without  regard  to  ties  of 
nature  in  either  direction. ^  On  the  other  hand,  the 
guilty  may  be  spared  or  blessed  on  account  of  the 
righteousness  of  other  men.^ 

The  Old  Testament,  then,  allows  the  transfer  both  of 
guilt  and  righteousness  from  one  person  or  generation 
to  another,  the  imputation  of  the  merits  and  demerits 
of  other  persons.  This  arises  from  the  fact  that  in 
Israel  as  in  antiquity  in  general,  the  idea  of  solidarity 
was  very  fully  developed ;  ^  the  individual  was  sacrificed 

1  Ex.  XX.  5  ;  xxxiv.  7  ;  Lev.  xxvi.  39 ;  Num.  xiv.  18 ;  Deut.  v.  9  ; 
Amos  vii.  16  f. ;  Hos.  iv.  6  ;  Jer.  ii.  9  ;  xxxii.  18  ;  Lam.  v.  7  ;  Isa.  xiv. 
21  ;  Ixv.  6,  7  ;  Job  xxi.  19 ;  Dan.  ix,  16 ;  Ps.  cix.  14. 

'^  Deut.  i.  37  ;  iii.  26  ;  iv.  21 ;  2  Kings  xxiii.  26  ;  xxiv.  3  f. ;  Jer.  xv. 
4  ;  Isa.  liii. 

3  Gen.  xviii.  26  ff. ;  Deut.  ix.  26  f.  ;  1  Kings  xi.  13,  32,  34,  36  ;  xv. 
3-5  ;  2  Kings  viii.  19  ;  xix.  34  ;  xx.  6  ;  Jer.  v.  1 ;  Job  xlii.  8. 

*  Gen.  XX.  9  ;  xxvi.  10 ;  Num.  xvi.  25-33 ;  Josh.  vii. ;  2  Sam.  xxi. 
1-14  :  xxiv.  1  ff, 


SECOND    PERIOD.  —  §  20.   THE   GUILT   OF   SIN.      199 

to  the  community.  The  old  covenant,  in  fact,  was  a 
covenant  beween  God  and  Israel  taken  collectively, 
and  not  a  covenant  with  individuals ;  they  were  little 
accounted  in  comparison  with  the  famil}-,  the  tribe,  or 
the  nation.  It  is.  moreover,  a  matter  of  experience 
that  children  often  suffer  for  the  faults  of  their  fathers. 
But  it  is  not  right  to  conclude  that,  therefore,  the  chil- 
dren are  as  guilty  as  the}^  and  of  their  faults;  they  are 
much  more  to  be  pitied  than  blamed.  Havernick  ^ 
and  Oehler^  remind  us  also  that  vices  easily  propagate 
themselves  in  the  same  family.  We  do  not,  however, 
believe  with  these  two  scholars  that  this  is  the  consid- 
eration that  gave  rise  to  the  view  expressed  Ex.  xx.  5, 
and  elsewhere,  where  it  is  said  that  God  visits  the 
iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children.  It  is  our 
modern  individualism  that  attributes  to  the  sacred 
authors  this  way  of  thinking,  because  we  have  difficulty 
in  believing  that  God  punishes  the  righteous  instead  of 
the  guilty.  The  ancients,  being  much  less  individual- 
istic than  we,  had  not  the  same  scruples.  Oehler,  i»n 
defence  of  his  statement,  says  that  the  passages  in  ques- 
tion are  very  imperfectly  understood  "when  they  are 
made  to  say  that  God  visits  the  sins  of  the  fathers  upon 
innocent  children,  and  that  he  causes  the  blessing  of 
pious  fathers  to  rest  upon  their  most  degenerate  descend- 
ants." It  is  certain  that  the  sacred  authors  thought 
neither  of  innocent  children  nor  completely  degenerate 
descendants.  But  they  had  just  as  little  thought  that 
the  children  and  descendants  had  sinned  like  their  par- 
ents and  ancestors,  and  been  punished  for  that  reason, 
as  Oehler  would  have  it.  The  truth  is  that  they  ignored 
1  Theologie,  p.  113.  2  §  75. 


200  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

the  moral  worth  of  the  descendants  and  believed  in 
heredity  of  merit  and  demerit.  Because  these  passages 
mean  that  God  punishes  or  blesses  children  for  their 
fathers,  without  regard  to  their  own  conduct  and  moral 
worth,  a  feeling  of  justice  afterwards  arose  in  opposi- 
tion to  this  way  of  thinking  and  gave  rise  to  the  convic- 
tion that  each  one  was  punished  only  for  his  own  sins.^ 
The  above  discussion  proves  that  the  traditional 
doctrine  of  original  sin,  which  teaches  the  heredity  of 
the  guilt  of  Adam,  finds  some  support  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, although  it  nowhere  says  that  the  guilt  of 
Adam  was  transmitted  to  his  descendants  or  even  to 
the  whole  human  race.  It  allows,  in  fact,  that  guilt 
may  be  transmitted  and  sometimes  is  transmitted  from 
father  to  son,  and  from  one  generation  to  another.  On 
the  other  hand,  however,  it  cannot  be  said  to  favor  the 
doctrine  teaching  that  the  natural  state  of  man  is  a  state 
of  guilt,  that  the  innate  inclination  to  evil  renders 
man  worthy  of  eternal  damnation  from  his  birth.  The 
Old  Testament,  on  the  contrary,  sees  in  this  native 
evil  inclination  an  extenuating  circumstance  which 
the  sinner  may  plead  before  God.  The  book  of  Job 
asks  that  God  be  not  too  strict  with  man,  on  account  of 
his  natural  weakness ;  that  he  exercise  forbearance 
toward  him,  because  it  is  impossible  that  a  pure  man 
should  spring  from  an  impure  one.^  One  of  the  psalmists 
also  alleges  as  a  reason  that  should  procure  him  forgive- 
ness with  God  the  fact  that  he  was  conceived  and  born  in 
sin.*     Another  psalmist  says  that  God  has  compassion 

1  Jer.  xxxi.  29  f. ;  Ezek.  xviii ;  xxxiii.  10-20  ;  Deut.  xxiv.  16  ;  2  Kings 
xiv.  6  ;  Prov,  ix.  12. 

■^  xiv.  1-4  ;  comp.  xiii.  25  f.  ;  x.  8-14  ;  vii.  12-21.  3  pg.  n.  5. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  21.    THE   DAY  OF  JUDGMENT.       201 

on  those  who  fear  him,  as  a  father  has  compassion  on 
his  children,  because  he  knows  our  origin,  and  remem- 
bers that  we  are  dust.^  Even  in  document  A,  God 
promises  not  to  curse  the  earth  on  account  of  man,  be- 
cause the  designs  of  his  heart  are  evil  from  his  youth. ^ 
According  to  deutero-Isaiah  God  would  not  contend 
and  be  angry  forever,  because  the  spirit  and  the  souls 
of  his  creatures  faint  in  his  presence.^ 

We  see  that  these  passages  give  to  the  natural  weak- 
ness of  man,  whether  physical  or  moral,  the  force  of  a 
reason  that  should  secure  for  him  the  divine  forbearance. 
This  view  is  unquestionably  much  more  correct  than 
the  orthodox  doctrine  of  native  and  hereditary  guilt. 

§  21.    THE  DAY  OP  JUDGMENT. 

The  prophets  generally  first  set  forth  the  unfaithful- 
nesses of  Israel,  as  well  as  those  of  other  peoples,  and 
afterward  the  day  of  judgment,  when  the  penalties 
decreed  will  break  upon  the  guilty.  This  day  is  often 
called  the  day  of  Jehovah.*  Then,  in  fact,  will  be  dis- 
played more  clearly  than  ever  his  supreme  power,  and 
he  will  triumph  over  his  enemies ;  ^  then  also  he  will  be 
known  and  glorified  by  the  whole  world. ^  It  will  be 
a  day  of  extraordinary  terror,   causing  commotion    in 

1  Ps.  ciii.  13  f.  2  Gen.  viii.  21.  3  isa.  Ivii.  16. 

*  Amos  V.  18,  20  ;  Zeph.  i.  7,  14 ;  Zech.  iv.  1 ;  Isa.  xiii.  6,  9  ;  Ezek. 
xiii.  5  ;  xxx.  .3 ;  Joel  i.  15 ;  ii.  1.  11,  31  ;  iii.  14 ;  Ob.  15. 

5  Isa.  ii.  12  ff. ;  v.  15  f.  ;  Jer.  xivi.  10 ;  etc. 

6  Isa.  xix.  21  f.  ;  xlix.  26  ;  Ezek.  vi.  7,  10  ;  xi.  10,  12  ;  xii.  15  f.,  20 ; 
xxii.  15  f.  ;  xxv.  5,  7,  11,  17  ;  xxvi.  6  ;  xxviii.  22-24  ;  xxix.  6,  9,  16  ;  xxx. 
8,  19,  25  f.  ;  xxxii.  15  ;  xxxiii.  29 ;  xxxviii.  16,  22  f.  ;  xxxix.  6  f.,  13, 
211,  28;  Joel  iii.  14-17. 


202      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

heaven  and  earth.  ^  It  will  put  an  end  to  the  present 
world,  and  open  a  new  era,  as  is  indicated  by  the  term 
acharith-hayyammi,  the  end  of  the  days,  by  which  it  is 
designated,^  and  as  is  suggested  by  the  description  of 
the  coming  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  with  which  we 
shall  soon  become  acquainted.  The  prophets  for  the 
most  part  thought  that  this  day  was  nigh.^  They  saw 
in  every  striking  public  misfortune  the  prelude  to  the 
day  of  judgment,  and  in  every  extraordinary  deliverance 
the  commencement  of  the  Messianic  era.*  As  the  ful- 
filment of  these  predictions  was  delayed,  many  of  the 
Israelites  were  led  to  make  sport  of  the  prophetic  vis- 
ions and  discourses.^ 

The  punishment  foretold  to  Israel  by  almost  all 
the  prophets  is  destruction,  oppression,  and  captivity. 
The  foreign  peoples  will  serve  as  instruments  in  the 
hands  of  God  in  executing  this  penalty.  Since  the 
prophets  generally  allow  themselves  to  be  guided  in 
their  predictions  by  the  political  condition  of  their  time, 
the  oldest  of  our  prophetical  books  foretell  that  it  will 
be  chiefly  the  Assyrians  and  the  Egyptians  who  will 
inflict  upon  Israel  the  penalties  merited  by  their  un- 
faithfulness.^    From  Jeremiah  on,  the  Chaldeans  under 

1  Amos  viii.  8  f.  ;  Isa.  ii,  9  ff.,  19  ff.  ;  xiii.  6  ff.  ;  xxiv.  17  ff. ;  Hab. 
iii.  3  ff. ;  Ezek.  xxxii.  7  ff.  ;  xxxviii.  19  ff. ;  Hag.  ii.  6,  21  f.  ;  Joel  ii. 
30  f. ;  iii.  14  f. 

2  Gen.  xlix.  1  ;  Num.  xxiv.  14  ;  Hos.  iii.  5  ;  Isa.  ii.  2  ;  Jer.  xxx.  24 ; 
xlviii.  47  ;  Ezek.  xxxviii.  8,  16. 

3  Mic.  vii.  4 ;  Zeph.  i.  7,  14  ;  Isa.  x.  25  ;  xiii.  6,  9,  22  ;  xxix.  17  ; 
Ezek.  xxx.  3  ;  xxxvi.  8;  Hag.  ii.  6  ;  Joel  i.  15  ;  ii.  1 ;  iii.  14  ;  Ob.  15. 

*  Oehler,  §  215  ;  Sclmltz,  II.  pp.  356  f. 

5  Ezek.  xii.  22-28  ;  comp.  Isa.  xxviii.  14  ff. 

6  Hos.  viii.  13 ;  ix.  3,  6 ;  x.  6 ;  xi.  5,  11  ;  Isa.  vii.  17  ff. ;  viii.  4  ff. ; 
xi.  11  ff.  ;  Mic.  vii.  12. 


SECOND  PERIOD. —  §  21.   THE   DAY  OF  JUDGMENT.      208 

the  leadership  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon, 
are  regarded  as  destined  to  be  the  chief  instruments  of 
these  penalties.^.  Besides  the  sword,  Jehovah  will  em- 
ploy famine,  pestilence,  and  other  plagues  in  punishing 
the  unfaithful  people. ^ 

Most  frequently  the  prophets  represent  the  judgment 
as  a  complete  destruction,  because  they  have  in  view 
the  majority  of  the  guilty  people.  But  in  reality  they 
thought  that  a  remnant  would  escape  the  catastrophe. 
Even  Amos  teaches  that  the  judgment  will  rather  be  a 
sorting:  the  good  will  be  separated  from  the  wicked; 
the  latter  will  perish;  the  others,  a  small  remnant,  a 
tenth  of  the  mass  of  the  nation,  will  return,  after  having 
been  carried  into  captivity,  to  their  country.  ^  In  one 
passage,  characteristic  in  this  respect,  Isaiah  foretells 
that  the  cities  will  be  devastated  and  stripped  of  inhab- 
itants, until  there  will  be  no  one  in  the  houses,  and 
the  country  will  be  a  solitude,  a  desert;  that,  if  there 
remain  a  tenth  of  the  inhabitants  they  in  their  turn  will 
be  annihilated.  The  overthrow,  then,  seems  to  be  com- 
plete. Yet  the  passage  closes  with  these  words :  "  As  the 
terebinth  and  the  oak  retain  their  stump,  when  they  are 
cut  down,  another  posterity  shall  spring  from  this  peo- 
ple."* Thus  the  present  guilty  generation  must  dis- 
appear, but  to  give  place  to  a  new  and  pure  one.  The 
judgment  may  also  be  compared  to  the  harvesting  of 
grain  and  the  gathering  of  olives,  in  which  all  is  car- 

1  Jer.  XX.  4  ff.  ;  xxii.  25  ;  xxv.  9-11 ;  xxvii.  12-22  ;  xxxii.  24  f.,  36  ; 
xxxiv.  2  f.,  21 ;  xxxvii.  17  ;  Hab.  i.  6  ff. ;  Ezek.  xxiii.  22  f.  ;  xvii.  12  ff. ; 
xii.  13. 

2  Jer.  xiv.  12,  16,  18  ;  xv.  2  f.  ;  xvi.  4 ;  xxix.  17  f.  ;  xxxii.  24,  36  ; 
Ezek.  V.  16  f . ;  vi.  11  f. ;  vii.  15  ;  xxxiii.  27. 

3  V.  3,  15  ;  ix.  8-10,  14  f.  -»  Isa.  vi.  11-13, 


204  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

ried  away  except  a  small  remnant  of  gleanings  and  scat- 
tered berries.  1  Elsewhere  we  learn  that  the  judgment 
is  not  to  result  in  the  total  extermination  of  the  people 
Israel, 2  but  that  they  are  to  be  made  to  pass  through 
the  crucible  of  trial,  that  all  the  impure  elements  may 
be  eliminated. 2  Thus  in  numerous  prophetic  passages 
there  is  reference  to  a  remnant  that  will  escape  the 
catastrophe  of  the  judgment  and  be  the  nucleus  of  the 
new  people  of  God.*     We  shall  discuss  it  farther  on. 

But  the  judgment  is  not  to  affect  Israel  alone ;  it  is 
to  be  executed  against  the  heathen  peoples  also.  Amos, 
at  the  beginning  of  his  book,  speaking  for  Jehovah, 
foretells  destruction  to  the  peoples  adjoining  Israel ;  the 
Syrians,  the  Philistines,  the  Phoenicians,  the  Edomites, 
the  Ammonites,  guilty  of  crimes  against  Israel,  and  the 
Moabites,  who  have  outraged  a  king  of  Edom.^  After 
him,  most  of  the  prophets,  along  with  threats  against 
Israel,  utter  threats  against  the  heathen  peoples,  fore- 
telling the  judgment  and  the  penalties  of  God  which 
will  overtake  them  as  the  reward  of  their  wickedness. 
In  the  books  of  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel,  is  found 
a  series  of  chapters  that  contain  onl}^  predictions  of 
this  kind.^  They  are  chiefly  directed  against  the  peo- 
ples adjoining  Palestine,  with  whom  Israel  maintained 
relations. 

1  Isa.  xvii.  4-6. 

2  Jer.  iv.  27  ;  v.  10,  18  ;  Zech.  xiii.  8  ;  xiv.  2  ;  Isa.  Ixv.  8  f. 

3  Isa.  i.  25  ;  Ezek.  ix.  4  ff.  ;  xx.  38  ;  Zech.  xiii.  7-9 ;  Mai.  iii.  1  ff. 

*  Isa.  i.  9 ;  iv.  3 ;  x.  20-22  ;  xi.  11,  16  ;  xxiv.  6  ;  xxviii.  5  ;  xxxvii. 
31  f.  ;  xli.  14  ;  xlix.  6  ;  Jer.  vi.  9  ;  xxiii.  3  ;  xxxi.  7  ;  Ezek.  ri.  8  f .  ;  xii. 
16  ;  xiv.  22  ;  Mic.  ii.  12  ;  v.  6  f .  ;  Zeph.  ii.  9  ;  iii.  12  f .  ;  Deut.  iv.  27. 

Si.  3-ii.  3. 

6  Isa.  xiii.-xxi.,  xxiii. -xxvii. ;  Jer.  xxv.  9-38  ;  xxvii.  2-11 ;  xliii. 
3-13;  xlvi. -Ii.  ;  Ezek.  xxv. -xxxii.,  xxxv.,  xxxviii.  f. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  21.    THE   DAY   OP   JUDGMENT.      205 

Jehovah,  whose  eye  watches  foreign  nations  as  well  as 
the  tribes  of  Israel,  feels  offended  by  the  proud  might  of 
these  nations  and  undertakes  to  break  it.^  He  would 
humble  all  that  is  exalted  that  he  alone  may  be  exalted. ^ 
Assyria,  in  particular,  which  has  served  as  a  rod  in 
the  hands  of  God  to  punish  Israel,  has  grown  proud  of 
its  power  and  its  successes,  and  has  forgotten  its  depen- 
dence as  regards  God;  it  must,  therefore,  be  humiliated 
by  overthrow.^  Babylon,  also,  to  which  Jehovah  has 
delivered  his  people,  has  abused  its  power  and  been 
merciless  toward  the  captive  Israelites ;  it  has  become 
proud,  and  placed  its  confidence  in  wickedness ;  it  has, 
therefore,  merited  overthrow.* 

Besides,  the  heathen  peoples  appear  as  the  enemies 
of  Jehovah  and  his  people ;  so  that  God,  on  account  of 
his  jealousy,  believes  himself  obliged  to  punish  them  in 
order  to  revenge  himself  and  his  people.^  God  is  angry 
with  them  also  for  the  wickedness  that  they  have  prac- 
tised toward  others  and  especially  toward  Israel.^  What 
further  incites  him  against  them  is  their  idolatry.'''  The 
nations  and  kingdoms  that  do  not  serve  Jehovah  must 
be  exterminated.^ 

1  Zech.  ix.  1-6;  i.  15 ;  Hab.  ii.  4  ff.  ;  Ob.  3  ff.  ;  Isa.  xiv.  13  ff.  ; 
xvi.  6 ;  xxiii.  9  ;  xxv.  11 ;  xxvi.  5  ;  Jer.  xlviii.  29  ff.  ;  xlix.  16  ff.  ; 
1.  31  ff.  ;  Ezek.  xxvii.  1  ff, ;  xxviii.  1  ff. ;  xxix.  2  ff.,  9  ff.  ;  xxx.  18  ;  xxxi. 
1  ff.,  10  ff.  2  Isa.  ii.  11  ff. ;  V.  15  f. ;  xxxiii.  10. 

3  Isa.  X.  5  ff.  ;  xxxvii.  21-29.  *  Isa.  xlvii, 

5  Nab.  i.  2  fif. ;  Jer.  xlviii.  26,  42  ;  1. 14  f.,  24,  28  f.,  34  ;  Ii.  6,  11,  36  ; 
Isa.  XXXV.  4;  xlvii.  3  ;  Ixiii.  4  ;  Zech.  i.  14  f.  ;  Joel  iii.  21. 

6  Nab.  ii.  1  ff.  ;  iii.  1  ff.  ;  Zeph.  ii.  8  ff.  ;  Hab.  ii.  9  ff.  ;  Zecb.  xii.  9  ; 
xiv.  12  ;  Jer.  xii.  14  ;  xlviii.  27  ;  1.  17  f. ;  Ii.  24 ;  Ezek.  xxv.  3  ff.,  8  ff., 
12  ff.,  15  ff. ;  xxvi.  2  ff.  ;  xxxv.  5  ff.,  10  ff. ;  xxxvi.  2  ff. ;  xxxviiif.  ;  Isa. 
xiv.  4  ff.  ;  xii.  11  f.  ;  xlix.  25  ;  Ii.  22  f. ;  Joel  iii.  1  ff.,  19  ;  Ob.  10  ff. 

7  Jer.  1.  38  ff. ;  Ii.  47,  52.  s  Isa.  Ix.  12  ;  Jer.  xii.  17. 


206  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

God  executes  his  judgment  against  the  heathen  peo- 
ples by  choosing  the  most  powerful  among  them  to 
destroy  the  others.  Egypt  and  especially  Assyria  are 
first  called  to  play  this  part,  as  they  did  toward  Israel ;  ^ 
later  it  is  the  Chaldeans,  led  by  Nebuchadnezzar, ^  then 
the  other  peoples,  previously  governed  by  the  Chal- 
deans ;  ^  and  chiefly  the  Medes  and  Persians  under  King 
Cyrus.*  Sometimes  also  God  exterminates  a  people 
by  civil  Avars. ^  Or  perhaps  Israel,  after  having  been 
oppressed  by  foreign  peoples,  repay  them  in  kind.^ 
Finally,  God  interferes  directly  by  prodigies  and  ex- 
traordinary plagues.''' 

We  see,  in  fine,  that  the  judgment  of  God  upon  the 
world  is  executed  by  natural  means,  especially  by 
wars ;  but  by  reason  of  the  theocratic  standpoint  adopted 
in  Israel,  the  advancement  of  the  principal  Asiatic 
peoples  of  this  period  and  their  final  humiliation  are 
regarded  as  produced  by  God  himself,  who  thus  realizes 
his  purposes  respecting  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  and 
particularly  respecting  his  peculiar  people.  We  see 
also  that,  to  the  prophets,  the  world  is  equivalent  to 
the  peoples  who  came  within  their  narrow  geographical 
and  political  horizon. 

1  Isa.  vii.  18  ff. ;  viii.  4  ff.  ;  xx.  1  ff.  ;  xxiii.  13. 

2  Hab.  i.  5  ff. ;  Jer.  xxv.  9-11 ;  xxvii.  2-6 ;  xliii.  8-13 ;  xlvi.  ff.  ; 
Ezek.  xxvi.  7  ff.  ;  xxix.  18  ff.  ;  xxx.  10  ff.,  24  ff. ;  xxxii.  11. 

3  Hab.  ii.  8  ;  Jer.  xxv.  12  ff.  ;  xxvii.  7. 

4  Isa.  xliii.  14  ;  xlv.  1  ff. ;  xlviii.  14  ;  xiii. ;  xxi.  1  ff. ;  Jer.  1.  f. 
s  Isa.  xix.  2  ff. ;  Zech.  xiv.  13. 

6  Mic.  iv.  13 ;  Zeph.  ii.  9  ;  Zech.  xii.  6  ;  ii.  8  f.  ;  Joel  iii.  8  ;  Ob.  18. 

7  Mic.  vii.  15 ;  Zeph.  ii.  12  ;  Hab.  iii.  1  ff. ;  Zech.  xii.  4 ;  xiv.  3  f., 
12  ff. ;  Ezek.  xxviii.  23  ;  xxxviii.  20,  22 ;  Isa.  xiii.  9  ff.  j  Ixvi.  15  f.  ; 
Joel  iii.  14  ff. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  22.   SALVATION.  207 

§  22.    SALVATION. 
I.    The  Restoration  of  Israel  under  the  New  Covenant. 

Jehovah  cannot  completely  and  forever  cast  off  his 
people;  he  cannot  deal  with  them  according  to  his 
wrath;  when  he  sees  them  in  distress,  he  is  touched  with 
compassion,  as  a  mother  pities  the  fruit  of  her  bowels.^ 
He  is,  moreover,  bound  by  oaths  that  he  has  sworn  to 
the  fathers. 2  Finally,  he  cannot  abandon  his  people, 
on  account  of  his  name,  which  is  profaned  among  the 
heathen  nations  and  which  must  be  sanctified  by  the 
restoration  of  Israel,  that  these  nations  may  become  ac- 
quainted with  Jehovah  and  know  that  it  is  he  who  has 
upraised  that  which  was  thrown  down  and  planted  vthat 
which  was  laid  waste. ^ 

We  have  seen  that  the  judgment  of  God  is  not  to 
result  in  the  complete  extermination  of  Israel ;  that,  on 
the  contrary,  a  small  remnant  will  escape.  With  this 
remnant  Jehovah  will  make  a  new  and  an  everlasting 
covenant.*  It  will  be  a  new  Israel,  which  will  really 
be  the  people  of  Jehovah,  and  of  which  Jehovah  will 
be  the  God.^ 

But  to  this  end  the  people  must  fulfil  certain  condi- 
tions. They  must  profit  by  the  chastisements  endured ; 
they  must  confess  their  faults ;  they  must  return  to  Je- 

1  Hos.  xi.  8  f.  ;  Isa.  xlix.  15  f. ;  Jer.  xxxi.  3  ff.  2  Mic.  vii.  20. 

3  1  Sam.  xii.  22  ;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  22-36  ;  Isa.  xlviii.  9,  11. 

4  Hos.  ii.  14  ff. ;  Jer.  xxxi.  31-37  ;  xxxii.  40  ;  1.5;  Ezek.  xvi.  60,  62  ; 
xxxiv.  25 ;  xxxvii.  26  ;  Isa.  xlii.  6  ;  xlix.  8  ;  liv.  5-10  ;  Ixi.  8. 

5  Hos.  i.  10 ;  ii.  23 ;  Jer.  xxiv.  7  ;  xxx.  22  ;  xxxi.  1,  33 ;  xxxii.  38  ; 
Ezek.  xi.  20 ;  xiv.  11  ;  xxxiv.  24,  30  ;  xxxvi.  28  ;  xxxvii.  23,  27  ;  Zech. 
xiii.  9 ;  viii.  7  f. 


208  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

hovah  and  humbly  ask  his  forgiveness.^  Jehovah  does 
not  desire  that  his  people  should  die,  perish ;  he  desires 
their  conversion,  that  is  to  say,  that  they  should  live 
and  be  saved. ^  He  will,  on  their  repentance,  grant  his 
people  a  full  pardon. ^  He  will  pour  his  spirit  upon  the 
new  Israel,*  the  members  of  which  will  be  taught  by 
himself.^  The  whole  land  will  be  filled  with  the 
knowledge  of  Jehovah.^  God  will  give  to  his  people  a 
new  spirit ;  he  will  replace  their  stony  heart  with  a  heart 
of  flesh;  he  will  imprint  upon  it  his  law  and  his  fear, 
that  he  may  render  it  fit  to  fulfil  his  commands.^  Thus 
will  be  formed  a  holy,  righteous,  faithful  people,  fear- 
ing God,  purified  by  him  from  all  stains.^  Idolatry 
and  every  superstition  will  disappear  from  the  midst 
of  his  people.^  According  to  Ezekiel,  an  ecclesiastical 
will  correspond  to  this  religious  and  moral  regeneration ; 
Jerusalem  will  have  a  splendid  sanctuary,  a  Levitical 
worship  well  regulated   and  free   from   all    impurity; 

1  Hos.  xiv.  1  f .  ;  Isa.  i.  27  ;  x.  20  ff. ;  Jer.  iii.  14,  22  ff.  ;  xxiv.  7  ; 
xxix.  13 ;  xxxi.  9,  18  f . ;  1.  4  f . ;  Ezek.  vi.  9 ;  xvi.  61-63  ;  xx.  43  ; 
xxxvi.  31  ;  Deut.  iv.  30  ;  xxx.  1  f.,  8. 

2  Ezek.  xviii.  23,  30-32  ;  xxxiii.  11. 

3  Mic.  vii.  18  f.  ;  Isa.  xxxiii.  24  ;  xliii.  25  ;  xliv.  22  ;  Iv.  7  ;  Jer.  xxxi. 
34  ;  xxxiii.  8  ;  1.  20 ;  Ezek.  xvi.  63  ;  Zech.  iii.  9  ;  v.  5  ff. 

4  Isa.  xxxii.  15  ;  xlii.  1  ;  xliv.  3 ;  lix.  21  ;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  27  ;  xxxix. 
29  ;  Joel.  ii.  28  f .  ^  Isa.  liv.  13  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  34. 

6  Isa.  xi.  9 ;  Jer.  xxxi.  34. 

7  Jer.  xxiv.  7  ;  xxxi.  33  ;  xxxii.  39  f .  ;  Ezek.  xi.  19  f.  ;  xxxvi.  26  f. ; 
Deut.  xxx.  6. 

8  Isa.  i.  26  f.  ;  iv.  3  f.  ;  vi.  13  ;  xxvi.  2  ;  xxxii.  16  ;  xxxv.  8 ;  Iii.  1  ; 
Ix.  17  f .,  21 ;  Ixii.  12  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  23  ;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  25,  33 ;  xxxvii.  23  f. ; 
xliii.  7  ;  Ob.  17  ;  Zeph.  iii.  9,  13 ;  Zech.  v.  1-4  ;  viii.  3 ;  xiii.  9  ;  xiv. 
20  f.  ;  Joel  iii.  17. 

9  Isa.  xxx.  22  ;  xxxi.  17  ;  Ezek.  xi.  18  ;  xxxvii.  23  ;  Hos.  ii.  17  ; 
xiv.  8  ;  Mic.  v.  12-14  ;  Zecli.  ix.  7  ;  xiii.  2. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  22.    SALVATION.  209 

there  will  reign  a  state  of  things  entirely  new  and  truly 
ideal.  1  A  number  of  other  prophets,  especially  among 
the  latest,  also  express  the  hope  that  the  Levitical 
worship  will  maintain  its  importance  under  the  new 
covenant.  2 

Then  Jehovah  will  again  dwell  in  Zion,  in  the  midst 
of  his  people,  of  whom  he  will  be  the  king  and  the 
saviour. 3  He  will  gather  about  him  the  Israelites  scat- 
tered among  the  heathen  nations.*  The  most  cordial 
union  and  agreement  will  ever  reign  between  the  king- 
dom of  Israel  and  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  which  will  be 
subject  to  one  and  the  same  head,  a  descendant  of  David. ^ 
The  king  of  this  new  Israel  will  be  surrounded  by  great 
glory. 6  He  and  his  princes  will  govern  in  righteous- 
ness and  uprightness.'  This  wonderful  restoration 
appears  to  the  eyes  of  the  prophets  like  a  veritable 
resurrection.^ 

The  new  people  of  God  will  multiply  extraordinarily 
and  extend  themselves  afar.^     They  will  be  strong  and 

1  Chaps,  xl.-xlviii. 

2  Zech.  xiv.  16  ff. ;  Jer.  xxxi.  14  ;  xxxiii.  18,  21  f. ;  Isa.  xix.  21 ; 
Ivi.  7  ;  Ix.  13  ;  Ixvi.  21,  23  ;  Mai.  i.  11  ;  iii.  3  f. 

3  Mic.  ii.  13 ;  iv.  7  ;  Zeph.  iii.  15,  17 ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  27  ;  xliii.  7  ; 
xlviii.  35 ;  Jer.  iii.  17  ;  Isa.  xxiv.  23  ;  Joel  iii.  17,  21 ;  Zech.  ii.  11- 
13  ;  viii.  3  ;  Mai.  iii.  1. 

4  Isa.  xi.  11  ff. ;  xiv.  1  ;  xxvii.  12  f.  ;  xliii.  5-7  ;  xlix.  12,  17-22  ;  Ix. 
4 ;  Ixvi.  20 ;  Jer.  iii.  18  ;  xvi.  15  ;  xxiii.  8 ;  xxix.  14  ;  xxx.  3,  10,  18  ; 
xxxi.  8,  10  ;  xxxii.  37,  44  ;  xxxiii.  7  ;  Ezek.  xi.  17  f.  ;  xxxiv.  12  ;  xxxvi. 
24  ;  xxxix.  27  ;  Hos.  xi.  10  f.  ;  Amos  ix.  14  ;  Mic.  ii.  12 ;  iv.  6  ;  Zeph. 
iii.  18-20  ;  Zech.  x.  8  ff. ;  viii.  7  f.;  Deut.  xxx.  3-5. 

5  Hos.  i.  11  ;  iii.  5  ;  Amos  ix.  11  ;  Isa.  xi.  13  ;  Jer.  iii.  18 ;  xxxi.  ; 
1.  4  ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  15  ff.,  24  ff.  6  jga.  xi.  10 ;  xxxiii.  17. 

'  Isa.  xxxii.  1 ;  Jer.  xxxiii.  15. 

8  Hos.  vi.  1-3  ;  xiii.  14  ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  1-14  ;  Isa.  xxvi.  18  f. 

9  Isa.  ix.  3,  7  ;  xxvi.  15;  xxxiii.  17  ;  xlix.  19-21  ;  liv.  2  f.;    Ix.  22 ; 


210  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

happy,  and  no  longer  fear  foreign  poAvers.^  They  will, 
on  the  contrary,  subdue  the  other  peoples  under  their 
yoke  or  else  destroy  them.^  Other  passages  say  that 
the  foreign  peoples  will  themselves  voluntarily  submit 
to  the  new  Israel  and  serve  them.^  The  treasures  of 
the  nations  will  be  offered  to  Israel  and  to  their  God.^ 
Israel  will  live  in  peace  and  security  protected  from 
dangers,  and  the  whole  panoply  of  war  will  become  su- 
perfluous.^ They  will  enjoy  perfect  happiness.^  Uni- 
versal peace  will  be  established  on  earth.  "^ 

What  is  even  more  remarkable  than  all  this  is  that  the 
new  era  will  be  inaugurated  by  a  not  less  extraordinary 
change  that  will  take  place  in  nature  and  extend  from 
the  stars  of  heaven  to  the  beasts  of  the  field  and  the 
products  of  the  earth.  There  will  be  a  wonderful  abun- 
dance of  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  a  surprising  material 
prosperity,  a  state  of  things  so  like  fairy-land  that  the 
desert  will  be  changed  into  a  paradise.^     God  will  make 

Jer.  iii.  16  ;  xxx.  19 ;  xxxi.  27  f.  ;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  10  f.,  37  f.  ;  xxxvii.  26  ; 
xlvii.  15  ff.  ;  Hos.  i.  10  ;  Amos  ix.  12  ;  Ob.  19  f .  ;  Zech.  ii.  4 ;  viii. 
4  f.  ;  ix.  10,  17  ;  x.  8. 

1  Isa.  ix.  4  ;  liv.  17  ;  Ix.  18  ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  28  f.  ;  xxxvi.  15  ;  Joel  iii. 

17  ;  Mic.  V.  5-9  ;  Zech.  ix.  8. 

2  Isa.  xi.  14 ;  xli.  14-16  ;  xlv.  14  ;  li.  22  f.  ;  Ixi.  5  ;  Joel  iii.  4-8 ; 
Amos  ix.  12  ;  Ob.  17-21 ;  Zeph.  ii.  4-7,  9 ;  Zech.  ix.  13  ff.;  x.  5ff. 

3  Mic.  iv.  1-3  ;  Isa.  ii.  2-4  ;  xi.  10  ;  xiv.  1  f .  ;  xliv.  5 ;  xlix.  22  f . ; 
Iv.  5  ;  Ix.  10-14. 

*  Isa.  xviii.  7  ;  xxiii.  17  f.  ;  xlv.  14  ;  Ix.  5ff.,  16  f.;  lxi.6  ;  Ixvi.  10  ff. ; 
Zeph.  iii.  10  ;  Hag.  ii.  7  f.  ;  Zech.  xiv.  14. 

5  Isa.  iv.  6  ;  xxxii.  16-18  ;  xxxiii.  6  ;  Ix.  17  f. ;  Jer.  xxx.  10  ;  xxxii. 
27  ;  xxxiii.  16  ;  Ezek.   xxviii.  26  ;  xxxiv.  25,  27 ;  xxxvii.  26  ;  Hos.  ii. 

18  ;  Mic.  iv.  4  ;  v.  8  f . ;  Hag.  ii.  9;  Zech.  ix.  10  ;  xiv.  11. 

6  Isa.  ix.  3  ;  li.  3  ;  Ixv.  18  f .  ;  Jer.  xxx.  19  ;  xxxi.  12-14  ;  xxxiii.  10  f . 
'  Mic.  iv.  3  ;  Isa.  ii.  4. 

8  Isa.  xxx.  23-25  ;  xxxii.  15  ;  xxxv.  1  f .,  6  f.  ;  xli.  17-20  ;  xliu.  19  f.  ; 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  22.    SALVATION.  211 

a  covenant  with  the  beasts  of  the  field,  the  birds  of 
heaven,  and  the  reptiles  of  the  earth,  ^  that  men  may  no 
longer  fear  them.^  According  to  other  passages  the  wild 
animals  will  be  exterminated  for  the  sake  of  the  safety 
of  men.^  Every  one  will  attain  an  advanced  age.*  One 
prophet  even  hopes  that  death  will  forever  be  abolished, 
and  that  God  will  also  dry  all  tears. ^  The  blind  will 
see,  the  deaf  hear,  the  dumb  speak,  the  lame  leap,  and 
no  one  will  be  sick  more.^  The  light  of  the  moon  will 
be  equal  to  the  brightness  of  the  sun,  and  the  bright- 
ness of  the  sun  will  be  sevenfold  greater.'^  According 
to  deutero-Isaiah  the  light  of  the  sun  and  the  moon  will 
even  be  replaced  by  Jehovah,  who  will  serve  as  a  light 
day  and  night. ^  There  will,  then,  in  reality  be  new 
heavens  and  a  new  earth. ^ 

This  state  of  things,  being,  as  we  have  seen,  based  on 
an  everlasting  covenant,  will  naturally  have  an  ever- 
lasting duration.  ^^ 

We  see  that,  under  the  new  covenant,  there  will  be 
a  sort  of  golden  age,  and  that  all  the  imperfections  of 
the  old  covenant  and  of  the  present  world  will  have 
disappeared.     Under  the  new  order  of  things  Israel  will 

xlix.  10  f.;  li.  13  ;  Iv.  1  f.,  13  ;  Ix.  17  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  12-14,  24  f. ;  xxxiii. 
12  f.  ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  26  f.,  29 ;  xxxvi.  29  f.  ;  xlvii.  1-12 ;  Hos.  ii.  21  f.; 
Joel  iii.  18  ;  Amos.  ix.  13  ;  Zech.  viii.  12  ;  ix.  17  ;  x.  1 ;  xiv.  8,  10. 
1  Hos.  ii.  18.  2  isa.  xi.  6-8  ;  Ixv.  25. 

3  Ezek.  xxxiv.  25,  28 ;  comp.  Isa.  xxxv.  9  ;  Lev.  xxvi.  6. 

4  Isa.  Ixv.  20  ;  comp.  Zech.  viii,  4  ;  Ex.  xxiii.  26. 

5  Isa.  XXV.  8  ;  comp.  Ixv.  19. 

6  Isa.  xxix,  18  ;  xxxiii.  23  f.  ;  xxxv.  5  f .  ;  comp.  Ex.  xxiii.  25. 

'  Isa.  XXX.  26.  8  Isa.  ix.  19  ;  comp.  xxiv.  23 ;  iv.  5. 

9  Isa.  Ixv.  17  ;  Ixvi.  22. 

10  Jer.  vii.  7  ;  xxiv.  6  ;  xxxi.  36,  40  ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  25 ;  Isa.  xxxy. 
10  ;  Ixv.  22  ;  Ixvi.  22  ;  Joel  iii.  20  ;  Amos  ix.  15  ;  Mic.  iv.  7. 


212      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

be  faithful  in  all  respects  to  their  Gocl,  and  consequently 
enjoy  without  measure  all  divine  blessings,  material 
and  spiritual.  It  is  clear,  however,  from  the  above  dis- 
cussion that,  in  the  eyes  of  the  prophets,  the  future 
world  will  not  be  a  celestial,  but  a  terrestrial  one,  the 
present  world  transformed  or  transfigured. 


II.    The  Participation  of  the   Gentiles  in  the  New 
Covenant. 

The  judgment  of  God  against  the  heathen  peoples  will 
not  result  in  their  complete  extermination.  Just  as  a 
remnant  of  Israel  will  come  forth  from  the  judgment 
purified,  to  form  the  nucleus  of  a  new  people  of  Jehovah, 
so  some  among  the  heathen  peoples  will  escape  and 
survive  the  catastrophe  of  the  judgment. ^  Those  who 
escape  will  be  able  to  participate  in  the  final  salvation, 
the  new  covenant,  made  between  Jehovah  and  the  new 
Israel. 

Two  passages,  almost  identical,  one  found  in  Isaiah 
and  the  other  in  Micah,  which  seem  to  be  copied  from 
an  older  prophetic  document,  thus  early  give  us  a  clear 
glimpse  of  such  a  prospect.  They  say  that  at  the  end 
of  the  da3^s,  i.e.  at  the  end  of  the  present  era,  and  in 
the  time  of  the  new  covenant,  all  peoples  will  flow  to 
the  mountain  of  the  house  of  Jehovah,  to  be  taught  in  the 
law,  in  the  word  of  Jehovah ;  and  then  Jehovah  will 
be  their  judge,  their  arbiter;  they  will  no  more  draw 
the  sword  against  one  another,  they  will  not  longer  learn 

1  Zech.  xiv.  16  ;  ix.  6  f.  ;  Jer.  xlviii.  42,  comp.  with  v.  47  ;  xlix. 
1-5,  comp.  with  v.  6  ;  Ezek.  xlix.  13  ff.;  Isa.  xlv.  20. 


SECON   DPERIOD.  —  §  22.    SALVATION.  213 

to  make  war,  but  they  will  transform  their  arms  into 
agricultural  implements.^ 

Micah,  it  is  true,  does  not  seem  to  have  completely 
assimilated  the  universalism  that  these  words  express. 
He  adds  immediately  afterwards :  "  While  all  the  peo- 
ples walk,  each  in  the  name  of  its  god,  we  will  walk 
in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  our  God,  forever  and  ever."^ 

Micah,  then,  seems  to  have  admitted  that  the  partic- 
ularism according  to  which  Jehovah  is  only  the  God 
of  Israel,  would  endure  forever.  He  treats  the  for- 
eign peoples  as  enemies  and  gives  us  to  understand  that 
they  will  be  completely  overthrown  and  governed  by 
Israel.  This  follows  especially  from  v.  7-9,  where 
he  says  of  the  remnant  of  Jacob  that  it  will  fall  upon 
the  other  peoples  as  suddenly  and  unexpectedly  as  the 
dew,  and  will  be  among  them  like  a  lion  among  the 
beasts  of  the  forest,  like  a  young  lion  among  the  flocks 
of  sheep,  that  tramples  and  rends,  with  none  to  deliver. 
Verse  9,  in  particular,  leaves  the  enemies  of  Israel  no 
other  prospect  than  that  of  extermination. 

This  view  is  found  in  other  prophetic  writings,  in 
which  the  heathen  peoples  are  treated  as  enemies  of 
God  and  Israel,  worthy  of  the  most  severe  penalties, 
without  the  least  prospect  of  salvation.  It  is  the  domi- 
nant view  in  most  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Salvation  is  promised  to  the  gentiles  only  in  certain 
prophetical  books,  and  in  some  few  passages  not 
prophetic. 

According  to  those  of  the  prophets  who  hope  for  the 
salvation  of  the  gentiles,  the  judgment  executed  by 
God  will  contribute  especially  to  their  conversion,  by 
1  Isa,  ii.  2-4  :  Mic.  iv.  1-3.  ^  Mic.  iv.  5. 


214  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD    TESTAMENT. 

making  them  understand  the  vanity  of  idolatry,  and 
acknowledge  that  Jehovah  is  the  only  true  God.^  The 
deliverance,  the  restoration,  and  the  new  glory  of  Israel 
will  produce  the  same  salutary  effect. ^  The  king  of 
the  new  covenant  will  be  like  a  banner  toward  which 
the  heathen  nations  Avill  turn.^  The  superiority  of  the 
law  and  the  word  of  Jehovah  will  beget  among  them 
the  desire  to  be  instructed  therein.*  Jehovah  will 
in  fact  establish  his  law  that  it  may  be  the  light 
of  the  peoples.^  Deutero-Isaiah  rises  to  a  standpoint 
almost  evangelical,  when  he  teaches  that  the  servant  of 
Jehovah,  i.e.  the  faithful  portion  of  Israel,^  will  pub- 
lish righteousness  to  all  the  nations  and  establish  it 
upon  the  whole  earth;  that  he  Avill  everywhere  make 
known  the  true  religion,  consisting  in  the  observance 
of  the  law,  the  practice  of  righteousness ;  ^  that  he  will 
be  the  light  of  the  nations,  and  will  carry  salvation  to 
the  ends  of  the  earth. ^  He  hopes  also  that  those  of 
the  heathen  peoples  who  escape,  after  having  become 
acquainted  with  the  glory  of  Jehovah  as  a  judge,  will 
be  sent  by  him  to  the  remote  nations  and  islands  that 
have  never  heard  of  him,  that  they  may  there  establish 
his  glory. ^ 

Sometimes  there  is  reference  only  to  the  conversion 

1  Isa.  xix.  21  f.  ;  xxv.  2  f.  ;  xlv.  5  f.,  14  ;  xlix.  26  ;  Zeph.  ii.  11  ;  Jer. 
xvi.  19-21  ;  Ezek.  xxv.  7,  11,  17  ;  xxvi.  6  ;  xxviii.  22-24  ;  xxix.  9 ; 
XXX.  8,  19,  25  f .  ;  xxxii.  15  ;  xxxviii.  16,  22  f . ;  xxxix.  6  f . 

2  Mic.  vii.  15-17  ;  Jer.  xxxiii.  9  ;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  23,  36  ;  xxxvii.  28  ; 
Isa.  xlv.  16  ff.  ;  lii.  10  ;  Iv.  5  ;  Ixi.  9, 11  ;  Ixii.  2  f.;  1  Kings  viii.  59  f. ; 
Ps.  Ixvii.  1  f.  3  Isa.  xi.  10, 12. 

*  Isa.  ii.  3  ;  Mic.  iv.  2  ;  Deut.  iv.  6,  8.  &  Isa.  li.  4. 

6  See  §  24.  '  Isa.  xlii.  1,  3  f.  «  Isa.  xlii.  6 ;  xlix.  6. 

*  Isa.  Ixvi.  18  f . ;  comp,  Zech.  viii.  21  f. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  22.    SALVATION.  215 

of  some  peoples.  Thus  Isaiah  foretells  the  conversion 
of  the  Assyrians  and  the  Egyptians,  who  will  make  a 
covenant  with  Israel,  and  form  with  them  the  people  of 
Jehovah.^  But  most  frequently  the  prophets  express 
the  hope  that  the  heathen  nations  in  general  will  turn 
to  Jehovah  and  participate  in  salvation. ^  Nevertheless 
they  foresee  exceptions ;  there  will  be  gentiles  who  Avill 
not  turn  to  Jehovah  and  serve  him;  they  will  be  pun- 
ished and  exterminated  by  God.^ 

In  these  predictions  of  a  universal  salvation  Israel- 
itish  prophecy  attained  its  culmination.  There  are, 
however,  as  we  have  seen,  only  certain  of  the  prophets 
who  announce  these  universalistic  hopes,  and  even  they 
stop  short  of  absolute  universalism ;  they  do  not  com- 
pletely renounce  particularism ;  they  claim  for  Israel, 
for  all  time,  great  advantages  over  the  other  peoples. 

First  of  all,  Jerusalem  will  remain  the  religious 
centre  of  humanity.  Thither  the  peoples  will  betake 
themselves  to  be  taught  in  the  law  and  the  word  of 
Jehovah.*  This  thought  is  really  very  natural.  The 
prophets  were  convinced  that  Israel  possessed  the  true 
religion.  History  has  justified  them;  religious  truth 
and  the  salvation  of  the  world  have  come  from  this 
people.^  They  therefore  had  a  right  to  declare  that 
other  nations  would  come  to  Jerusalem  to  be  taught  in 
saving  truth.  In  so  doing  they  maintained  in  sub- 
stance the  same  proposition  that  the  Christians  do  when 

1  Isa.  xviii.  7  ;  xix.  18-23. 

2  Isa.  ii.  2  ff.  ;  xxv.  3,  6  f .  ;  xlii.  1,  4,  6  ;  xlv.  22  f.  ;  xlix.  6 ;  li.  4  f.; 
Iv.  5  ;  Ivi.  7  ;  Ixvi.  23  ;  Mic.  iv.  1  ff.  ;  Zeph.  ii.  11  ;  iii.  9  ;  Jer.  iii.  17  ; 
xvi.  19 ;  Zech.  ii.  11  ;  viii.  22  f.  ;  xiv.  16  ;  Ps.  xxii.  27  ff.  ;  Ixvii.  3  ff.  ; 
cii.  22.  3  Zech.  xiv.  17-19  ;  Jer.  xii.  17  ;  Isa.  Ix.  12. 

*  Isa.  ii.  2  f. ;  Mic.  iv.  If.  s  Comp.  John  iv.  22. 


216  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

they  assert  that  the  heathen,  to  attain  salvation,  must  be 
converted  to  Christianity.  There  is  only  this  differ- 
ence, that  Christians  understand  that  they  must  go 
through  the  whole  earth  to  preach  the  gospel  to  all 
human  creatures,  while  the  prophets,  whose  geographi- 
cal horizon  was  less  extended,  thought  that  all  the  peo- 
ples could  without  difficulty  come  to  Jerusalem  to  be 
taught  in  the  law  and  in  the  service  of  the  true  God. 

The  prophets,  besides,  give  utterance  to  the  thought 
that  the  sanctuary  at  Jerusalem  is  the  only  place  to 
which  the  converted  gentiles  should  bring  their  offer- 
ings and  their  sacrifices,  and  that  they  should  there 
celebrate  the  feasts  in  honor  of  Jehovah,  and  call  upon 
his  name.^  Isaiah,  however,  admits  that  the  Egyp- 
tians may  erect  in  their  own  country  an  altar  to  Jeho- 
vah, to  offer  sacrifices  on  it.^  An  analogous  view  is 
perhaps  expressed  elsewhere.^  In  any  case  it  is  very- 
rare. 

What  most  offends  us  in  these  present  predictions  is 
that  the  people  Israel  are  to  remain,  under  the  new 
covenant,  the  political  centre  and  aristocracy  of  the 
kingdom  of  God.  And  it  is  well  known  that  this  is 
not  a  secondary  thought,  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
Old  Testament,  in  which  religion  generally  has  a  very 
pronounced  national  character.  The  prophets  foretell 
that  after  the  restoration  Israel  will  be  found  at  the 
head  of  the  other  peoples,  that  the  latter  will  be,  as  it 
were,  their  servants,  that  they  will   bring   back   from 

1  Isa.  xviii.  7  ;  xxv.  6  f.  ;  Ivi.  5-7  ;  Ix.  7,  13  ;  Ixvi.  20,  23  ;  Zech. 
xiv.  16  ff. ;  Jer.  iii.  17  ;  Hag.  ii.  7  f . ;  1  Kings  viii.  41-43. 

2  xviii.,  xix.,  xxi. 

>  Mai.  i.  11  ;  Zeph.  ii.  11;  comp.,  however,  iii.  10. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  23.    THE  MESSIAH.  217 

foreign  countries  their  scattered  members,  that  they 
will  bring  their  riches  to  them,  will  rebuild  their  cities 
for  them,  and  so  forth. ^  The  Israelites,  as  compared 
with  foreigners,  will  be  priests  of  Jehovah,  eating  the 
riches  of  the  nations  and  glorying  in  their  glory. ^  It 
should  be  observed  that  these  last  hopes  are  found 
chiefly  in  deutero-Isaiah,  who  on  the  whole  rose  to  a 
purer  spiritualism  and  a  broader  universalism  than  the 
other  prophets. 

It  follows  from  the  above  that  it  is  a  strange  mis- 
conception of  the  character  of  the  prophets'  teaching 
to  find  in  it  evangelical  ideas  concerning  the  'salvation 
of  the  world.  It  is  at  most  the  germs  of  these  ideas 
that  are  found  there.  We  have  seen  that  the  salvation 
of  Israel  is  there  regarded  as  the  perfect  realization  of 
the  terrestrial  theocracy  which  was  the  aim  of  the  law 
and  the  prophets.  Now  the  salvation  of  the  gentiles 
will  consist  in  their  incorporation  into  this  theocracy, 
yet  with  this  restriction,  that  they  will  occupy  only  a 
subordinate  rank,  that  they  will  be,  as  it  were,  the  serfs 
or  vassals  of  Israel. 


§  23.    THE  MESSIAH. 

The  prevailing  view  among  the  prophets  is  that 
Jehovah  himself  will  direct  the  events  of  the  new  cov- 
enant, that  he  will  execute  judgment  and  accomplish 
salvation.  This  is  altogether  conformable  to  the  theo- 
cratic  view   maintained   in   the    Old    Testament   and 

1  Isa.  xiv.  2  ;  xxiii.  18  ;  xlv.  14  ;  xlix.  22  f . ;  Iv.  3-5  ;  Ix.  3-17  ;  Ixi, 
6  ;  Ixvi.  20.  2  jga.  Ixi.  5  f . 


218  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

especially  by  the  early  Israelites,  who  would  recognize 
no  other  king  than  Jehovah.^ 

Later,  however,  a  legitimate  monarchy  had  succeeded 
in  establishing  itself  in  the  midst  of  the  people  of 
Jehovah;  then  the  thought  arose  that  under  the  new 
covenant  also  a  king,  sprung  from  the  ancient  royal 
famil}^,  would  occupy  the  throne  of  Israel.  This  king 
is  generally  called  the  Messiah,  the  Anointed  of  God, 
though  this  name  is  not  given  to  him  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. It  must,  however,  be  observed  that  he  is  re- 
ferred to  only  in  a  small  number  of  passages.  Several 
prophets  do  not  mention  him  at  all.  Christian  theol- 
ogy, it  is  true,  which  has  given  to  the  Messiah  an 
importance  much  greater  than  Israelitish  prophetism 
did,  has  held  that  he  appears  in  a  series  of  passages  in 
which  there  is  no  reference  to  him.  We  shall  not 
undertake  to  pass  in  review  all  these  passages  for  the 
sake  of  correcting  the  traditional  interpretation.  It 
has  been  done  in  numerous  works. ^  It  is  only  necessary 
to  set  forth  the  prophetic  teaching  to  show  to  all  unprej- 
udiced minds  that  this  teaching  differs  from  that  of  the 
New  Testament  on  the  same  subject,  and  that  in  identi- 
fying the  one  with  the  other  great  violence  is  done  to 
historical  truth.     • 

Amos  is  content  with  saying  that  under  the  new 
covenant  Jehovah  will  raise  up  the  house  of  David, 
that  he  will  repair  its  breaches,  that  he  will  restore  its 
ruins,  that  he  will  rebuild  it  as  it  was  before.^     Hosea 

1  Jud.  viii.  22  f.  ;  1  Sam.  viii.  5-8  ;  x.  18  f. 

2  See  especially  Baur,  Gesch.  der  AUtestam.  Weissagung ;  Anger, 
Qescli.  der  Messianischen  Idee ;  Hitzig,  Messianische  Weissagung. 

3  ix.  12. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  23.    THE   MESSIAH.  219 

also  hopes  for  the  restoration  of  the  house  of  David;  he 
says  that  in  the  new  order  of  things  the  children  of 
Israel  will  seek  Jehovah  their  God  and  David  their 
king.i  The  restoration  of  the  house,  the  dynasty,  of 
David,  is  in  fact  the  essence  of  the  Messianic  hope  of 
Israel  and  the  prophets,  and  not  the  sending  of  a  person, 
a  unique  king,  as  has  generally  been  believed  in  the 
Christian  church. 

Thus  Jeremiah  teaches,  in  the  most  explicit  manner, 
that,  in  the  Messianic  era,  an  uninterrupted  series  of 
kings,  princes,  will  occupy  the  throne  of  David ;  that 
the  posterity  of  David  will  be  multiplied,  in  order  that 
he  may  never  want  a  successor  ;2  that  Jehovah  will 
appoint  over  the  remnant  of  the  sheep  of  Israel,  gath- 
ered from  all  countries,  shepherds  who  will  feed  them.^ 
Ezekiel  is  in  perfect  accord  with  Jeremiah  on  this 
subject.  According  to  him  also,  the  house  of  Israel 
will  be  governed  by  a  series  of  kings,  after  the  glorious 
restoration  which  he  foretells ;  the  prince  who  occupies 
the  throne  will  have  sons  who  will  mount  it  after  him.* 
It  will  be  with  the  royal  house,  overthrown  by  the 
catastrophe  of  the  Exile,  as  with  a  broken  cedar,  of 
which  a  branch,  replanted,  will  grow  and  become  a 
great  tree.^  This  means  that  a  new  line  of  princes 
will  spring  from  the  old  royal  house,  the  house  of 
David. 

It  is  true  that  the  same  prophets  sometimes  seem  to 
speak  of  a  single  king  who  will  rule  over  the  new  Israel. 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  say  that  Jehovah  will  raise  up 
David  his  servant  that  he  may  be  king   over  Israel 

1  iii.  5.  2  xvii.  25  ;  xxii.  4  ;  xxxiii.  17-26.  ^  xxiii.  4., 

4  xliii.  7  ;  xlv.  8  ;  xlvi.  16-18.  5  xvii.  22-24. 


220  THEOLOGY    OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

forever.^  But  what  precedes  shows  in  what  sense 
these  declarations  must  be  understood.  David  is  here 
evidently  taken  collectively,  or  rather,  the  family  of 
David  is  individualized  in  its  head  and  called  servant 
of  Jehovah,  as  the  entire  people  Israel  is  individual- 
ized and  designated  by  this  title  not  only  in  deutero- 
Isaiah,  as  we  shall  see  later,  but  also  in  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel.2  Thus  also  prophetism  is  individualized, 
Deut.  xviii.  15,  18,  and  the  house  of  David,  1  Kings 
xii.  16. 

The  author  of  Zech.  xii.-xiv.  shares  the  idea  of  the 
preceding  prophets.  He  speaks  simply  of  the  house  of 
David,  which,  in  the  new  era,  will  be  powerful  as  the 
Deity,  as  the  angel  of  Jehovah,  while  the  feeblest  Isra- 
elite will  be  a  hero  like  David. ^ 

Isaiah  also  seems  to  share  this  view.  He  speaks  of 
princes  who  will  govern  the  new  people  of  God.*  He 
employs  the  same  comparison  that  we  have  found  in 
Ezekiel,  that  of  a  branch  that  will  spring  from  the 
stump  of  Jesse,  of  a  shoot  that  will  grow  from  his  roots, 
to  govern  and  judge  this  people.^  Is  this  not  the  col- 
lective idea  of  the  new  Davidic  dynasty?  In  chapter 
ix.  verse  7,  the  prophet  in  fact  speaks  of  the  throne  of 
David  and  of  his  kingdom  which  are  to  be  established 
and  maintained  by  justice  and  righteousness.  In  the 
verse  preceding,  however,  there  is  reference  to  a  child, 
newly  born,  on  whose  shoulder  the  government  is  to 
rest.  Micah  also  says  that  from  Bethlehem  shall  go 
forth  he  who  will  rule  over  Israel.^    Finally,  Zech.  ix. 

1  Jer.  XXX.  9  ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  23  f.  ;  xxxvii.  24  f. ;  comp.  Hos.  iii.  5. 

2  Jer.  XXX.  10 ;  xlvi.  27  f .  ;  Ezek.  xxviii.  25  ;  xxxvii.  25. 

3  xii.  8.  *  xxxii.  1.  e  xi.  1  ff.  «  v.  2  ff. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  23.    THE  MESSIAH.  221 

9  f.  speaks  of  the  king  who  will  come  to  Jerusalem  and 
establish  his  reign  from  one  sea  to  the  other. 

Did  these  prophets  think  that  one  and  the  same  king 
would  always  govern  the  Messianic  kingdom?  In  that 
case  they  would  disagree  with  the  prophets  to  whom 
reference  was  made  above,  which  would  prove  at  least 
that  in  Israel  the  expectation  of  a  unique  and  eternal 
Messiah  was  not  a  dogma.  But  it  is  more  probable  that 
there  was  not  on  this  subject  any  divergence  of  opinion 
among  the  prophets  but  that  all  expected  the  restora- 
tion of  the  dynasty  of  David,  which  was  to  be  main- 
tained forever  by  a  perpetual  descent;  for  this  is  the 
general  expectation  of  Israel.^ 

If  there  is  in  some  passages  reference  to  only  one 
king,  it  is  because  the  prophets  thought  that  there 
would  never  be  more  than  one  king  at  a  time  on  the 
throne,  and  further  because  their  attention  was  natu- 
rally fixed  upon  the  first,  the  one  who  was  to  inaugu- 
rate the  Messianic  kingdom;  this  is  certainly  the  case 
in  the  passages  cited  above,  Zech.  ix.,  Isa.  ix.,  and 
Mic.  V.  Haggai  thought  that  Zerubbabel,  who  had 
returned  to  Judah  at  the  head  of  the  first  exiles, 
would  be  the  king  of  the  restored  people,  and  that  in 
him  would  be  fulfilled  the  early  Messianic  prophe- 
cies. ^  Zechariah  appears  to  have  had  the  same  thought. 
He  foretells  the  coming  of  a  man,  a  servant  of  Jehovah, 
called  Sprout,  who  will  build  the  temple  of  Jehovah, 
who  will  wear  the  insignia  of  royalty  and  rule  upon 
his  throne.^     Now  according  to  iv.  9  it  is  Zerubbabel 

1  1  Kings  ii.  4  ;  viii.  25 ;  ix.  4  f .  ;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  3  f,,  29-37  ;  cxxxii. 
10-12.  2  ii.  21-23. 

3  iii.  9  ;  vi.  12  f.  ;  comp.  Jer.  xxiii.  5 ;  xxxiii.  15. 


222  THEOLOGY    OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

who  laid  the  foundation,  and  who  Avill  finish  the  tem- 
ple. Zechariah  had,  in  general,  great  hopes  of  this 
chief  of  the  Jewish  people.^  But  these  prophets  surely 
did  not  believe  Zerubbabel  immortal;  they  did  not 
therefore  expect  an  eternal  Messiah,  they  simply  placed 
Zerubbabel  at  the  head  of  the  royal  line  of  Israel. 

The  Messiah,  —  we  will  preserve  this  hallowed  title, 
even  while  giving  it  a  collective  sense,  —  is  to  be 
essentially  a  king,  i.e.  to  possess  and  exercise  sover- 
eignty in  every  acceptation  of  the  term.  Even  in  Hos. 
iii.  5  and  Zech.  ix.  9  he  is  called  a  king;  also  in  other 
passages  that  we  have  cited.  Executive,  and,  since 
these  also  were  exercised  by  the  ancient  kings  of  Israel, 
judicial,  functions  are  attributed  to  him.^  He  will  be 
surrounded  by  great  glory. ^  He  will  secure  peace  to 
his  extended  realm;*  but  this  will  be  by  means  of  war 
successfully  waged,  by  which  also  all  the  enemies  of 
Israel  will  be  annihilated.^ 

According  to  Ezekiel,  the  most  Levitical  of  the 
prophets,  an  important  duty  of  the  king  under  the  new 
covenant  will  be  to  furnish  the  numerous  victims  for 
the  sacrifices  of  the  feasts  and  other  solemnities.^  He 
will  offer  sacrifices  for  himself."  This  single  feature 
shows  that  the  prophets  had  ideas  of  the  Messiah  that 
square  perfectly  with  the  view  of  the  Old  Testament, 
but  differ  so  much  the  more  from  the  teaching  of  the 
gospel. 

1  Zech.  iv.  6  f. 

2  Zech.  ix.  10  ;  Isa.  ix.  6  ;  xi.  3  f.  ;  Mic.  v.  2,  4 ;  Jer.  xxiii.  5  ; 
XXX.  21 ;  xxxiii.  15  ;  Ezek.  xxi.  32. 

3  Isa.  xi.  10.  ^  Zech.  ix.  10 ;  Isa.  ix.  6  f.  ;  Mic.  v.  5. 

5  Zech.  ix.  13  ff.  ;  xii.  1  ff.;  Isa.  xi.,  xiv.  ;  Mic.  v.  5-9. 

6  xlv.  17,  22  ff.  '  xlvi.  2  ff. 


SECOND    PERIOD.  —  §  23.    THE   MESSIAH.  223 

The  character  and  qualifications  of  the  Messiah 
should  correspond  with  his  functions.  Being  called  to 
govern  an  ideal  kingdom,  in  which  all  the  imperfec- 
tions of  this  world  will  have  disappeared,  he  should 
himself  have  an  ideal  character,  and  possess  extraordi- 
nary qualifications.  But  w^e  should  do  violence  to  the 
teaching  of  the  Old  Testament,  if  we  tried  to  find  in  it 
the  doctrine  of  the  divinity  of  the  Messiah  for  the  pur- 
pose of  making  it  conform  to  the  Christian  dogma  of 
the  divinity  of  Christ.  Zechariah  distinctly  represents 
the  Messiah  as  a  man.i  Micah  says  that  Jehovah  is 
his  God. 2  We  have  seen  that  in  a  number  of  passages 
he  is  called  servant  of  Jehovah.  We  know  that,  sprung 
from  the  family  of  David,  he  will  perpetuate  his  stock 
in  a  natural  Avay.  He  is  everywhere,  as  respects  his 
nature,  placed  on  the  same  level  as  the  other  Israelites 
of  the  Messianic  kingdom.  Isaiah,  who  gives  him  the 
most  sublime  titles,  says  distinctly  that  the  great  quali- 
fications with  which  he  will  be  clothed  will  be  communi- 
cated to  him  by  the  spirit  of  Jehovah, ^  which,  we  have 
seen,  is  promised  to  all  Israel.  Thus  the  Messiah 
will  have  all  the  intellectual,  moral,  and  religious 
qualifications  necessary  for  governing  and  judging  his 
people.*  Isaiah  ix.  6  f.  means  nothing  else,  in  spite 
of  the  extraordinary  titles  that  we  there  encounter. 

In  this  passage  the  Messiah  is  called  Counsellor- 
prodigy,  Wonderful  Counsellor;  this  term  denotes  a 
qualification  essential  in  a  king  who,  like  this  one,  is 
to  procure  for  his  people  an  exceptional  degree  of  pros- 
perity.    He  is  called  Hero-god,  or,  according  to  Brus- 

1  vi.  12.  2  V.  4.  3  xi.  2.  4  xi.  2-5. 


224  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

ton,  Valiant  Warrior.^  The  title  El  does  not  authorize 
us  to  attribute  to  him  a  divine  nature,  since  this  same 
title  is  given  to  the  king  of  Babylon. ^  We  know  that 
other  kings  and  judges  are  called  gods,  without  any 
intention  of  attributing  to  them  a  divine  nature.  The 
Messiah  is  called,  according  to  some,  Everlasting 
Father;  according  to  others.  Father  of  Booty.  Both 
translations  are  grammatically  possible  (Reuss).  If 
the  second,  which  agrees  very  well  with  the  title  pre- 
ceding, be  adopted,  it  attributes  to  the  Messiah  victory 
over  his  enemies.  The  first  represents  him  as  the  father 
of  his  people. 3  If  eternity  is  attributed  to  him  this 
"means  that  he  will  effect  something  everlasting;  cause 
his  kingdom  and  his  dynasty  to  be  everlasting."^ 
Finally  he  is  called  Prince  of  Peace,  not  because  he 
will  not  make  war,  but  because,  as  a  valiant  hero,  he 
will  obtain  victory  over  all  his  enemies,  and  thus  give 
"  increase  to  the  empire,  and  a  peace  without  end  to  the 
throne  of  David  and  his  kingdom,"  as  the  passage  in 
question  says. 

Micah  represents  the  Messiah  especially  as  a  glorious 
king  who  will  govern  with  the  support  of  Jehovah,  and 
render  his  people  happy,  procuring  them  peace  by  vic- 
tory over  his  enemies,  and  particularly  over  the  Assyr- 
ians, so  formidable  to  Israel  in  the  time  of  the  prophet.^ 
Attempts  have  been  made  to  find  the  eternal  preexist- 
ence  of  the  Messiah  in  the  declaration  of  Micah  that 
"his  origin  dates  from  ancient  times,  from  the  daj^s  of 
eternity."     But  this  latter  expression  is  explained  b}^ 

1  Literature  Prophetique,  p.  141 ;  [G.  A.  Smith,  Book  of  Isaiah,  pp. 
136  ff.].  2  Ezek.  xxxi.  11.  3  "isa.  xxii.  21. 

4  Bruston,  p.  142  ;  [Scliultz,  II.  p.  403].  5  v.  4  ff. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  24.    SERVANT   OF   JEHOVAH.      225 

tlie  parallel  expression  "from  ancient  times."  The 
prophet  simply  means  that  the  Messiah  will  be  a  de- 
scendant of  the  ancient  family  of  David.  ^  The  word 
eternity  or  eternal  has  a  merely  relative  signification  in 
the  language  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  passage,  Zech.  xii.  8,  which  says  that  the  house 
of  David  will  be  like  the  Deity,  makes  a  simple  com- 
parison, meaning  that  the  royal  house,  at  the  head  of 
the  Israelites,  who  will  all  be  heroes,  will  be  as  it  were 
a  divine  power,  repelling  the  enemy.  Finally  the 
attempt  has  been  made  to  find  the  divinity  of  the 
Messiah  in  Jer.  xxiii.  6,  where  he  is  called  "  Jehovah 
our  righteousness."  But  Oehler  himself  opposes  this 
interpretation. 2  He  shows  that  it  is  said,  not  that  the 
Messiah  will  be  Jehovah  our  righteousness,  but  that  he 
is  simply  called  by  this  name ;  that  Jerusalem  receives 
the  same  title, ^  and  that  an  altar  is  called  "Jehovah  my 
standard. "  *  It  might  be  added  that  there  are  many  Isra- 
elitish  proper  names,  of  which  the  name  of  God  forms  a 
part,  yet  those  who  bore  them  are  not  believed  to  have 
been  partakers  of  divinity.  It  may  even  be  that  the 
name  in  question  was  not  applied  to  the  Messiah  at  all, 
but  to  Israel.^ 


§  24.    THE  SERVANT  OF  JEHOVAH. 

During  the  captivity  in  Babylon,  when  the  royal 
house  had  fallen  with  the  Israelitish  nationality, 
deutero-Isaiah  based  the  hope  of  the  Messianic  king- 

1  Bruston,  p.  256  ;  [Schultz,  II.  pp.  415  f.].  ^  §  231. 

3  Jer.  xxxiii.  16.  *  Ex.  xvli.  15. 

5  Schultz,  II.  p.  418  ;  Reuss  on  Jer.  xxiii.  6. 


226  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

dom  no  longer  on  a  descendant  of  David,  a  glorious 
and  triumphant  king,  but  upon  the  faithful  and  un- 
happy portion  of  the  people  to  which  he  gives  the  name 
servant  of  Jehovah.  He  speaks  of  them  more  particu- 
larly in  the  following  passages :  xli.  8  ff. ;  xlii.  1-7, 
18  ft'.;  xliii.  1-10;  xliv.  1  f.,  21-26;  xlv.4;  xlviii.  20; 
xlix.  1-9:  I,  4-10;  lii.  13-liii.  12. 

Traditional  theology  has  seen  in  the  servant  of  Jeho- 
vah the  Messiah,  and  has  regarded  the  passages  that 
speak  of  him  as  predictions  relating  to  Jesus  Christ. 
What  is  true  is  that  Jesus  fulfilled  the  most  sublime 
predictions  that  relate  to  the  servant  of  Jehovah.  But 
modern  historical  interpretation  has  had  no  difficulty 
in  demonstrating  that  our  prophet  says  not  a  single 
word  about  the  Messiah ;  that  he  assigns  to  the  servant 
of  Jehovah  a  character  and  role  entirely  different  from 
those  that  are  attributed  to  the  latter;  that  he  regards 
him  as  existing  in  the  present,  as  having  suffered  in 
the  past,  and  as  having  a  mission  to  fulfil  among  the 
exiled  people ;  that  finally  he  identifies  the  coming  of 
the  Messianic  kingdom  with  the  return  from  the  Exile, 
and  represents  it  after  a  manner  in  many  respects 
entirely  different  from  that  of  the  gospel. 

All  this  is  supported  by  evidence  that  any  one  who 
does  not  insist  upon  shutting  his  eyes  to  it  must  con- 
sider unanswerable.  It  was  easy  enough  to  make 
this  result  clear.  It  was  more  difficult  to  say  who,  to 
the  thought  of  the  prophet,  the  servant  of  Jehovah 
really  was.  To  this  question  modern  exegetes  give  very 
divergent  responses.  Some  have  seen  in  the  servant  of 
Jehovah  the  people  Israel  taken  in  their  concrete  reality; 
others,  the  ideal  people ;  still  others,  prophetism. 


SECOND  PERIOD. — §  24.    SERVANT   OF   JEHOVAH.      227 

These  divergencies  are  readily  explained.  Deutero- 
Isaiah  actually  gives  the  title  servant  of  Jehovah  to  the 
people  Israel  taken  in  their  historical  reality,  the  blind, 
sinful,  captive  people. ^  In  so  doing  he  only  adopts  the 
language  used  in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel.^  But  while 
these  last  two  prophets,  like  the  majority  of  their  pred- 
ecessors, condemn  Israel  in  the  mass,  and  accuse 
them  of  being  completely  corrupt,  the  first  distinguishes 
two  parts  among  the  peoj)le,  the  one  faithful,  the  other 
unfaithful.  He  knows  righteous  and  faithful  Israel- 
ites, he  knows  a  great  multitude  who  have  the  law  of 
God  in  their  hearts,  who  follow  the  right  way  and  shun 
evil.^  These  righteous  he  carefull}^  distinguishes  from 
the  unfaithful  part  of  the  people;  he  even  contrasts 
them  with  the  latter;  in  the  second  part  of  our  book 
he  calls  them  the  servants  of  Jehovah  in  contrast  Avith 
the  wicked.*  As  far  as  chapter  liii.,  on  the  contrary, 
this  faithful  part  of  the  people,  like  the  entire  nation, 
is  frequently  called  the  servant  of  Jehovah.^  This 
alone,  in  fact,  formed  the  true  Israel,  and  was  really 
the  servant  of  Jehovah,  while  the  whole  of  Israel  could 
receive  this  title  only  in  a  potential  sense,  inasmuch  as 
its  vocation  was  to  serve  God. 

It  is,  therefore,  wrong  to  claim,  as  has  been  done, 
that  deutero-Isaiah  gives  the  title  servant  of  Jehovah 
exclusively  either  to  the  entire  people  Israel  or  to  the 
faithful  fraction  of  the  people.  The  truth  is  that  he 
gives  it  by  turns  to  both  of  them.     He  presents  this 

1  xli.  8  ff. ;  xlii.  19  ff.;  xliv.  1  ff.,  21  f.  ;  xlv.  4  ;  xlviii.  20. 

2  Jer.  XXX.  10  ff.  ;  xlvi.  27  f.  ;  Ezek.  xxviii.  25  ;  xxxvii.  25  ;  comp. 
Ps.  cxxxvi.  22. 

3  li.  1,  7  ;  Mi.  1  f.  ;  lix.  15.  *  liv.  17  ;  Ixiii.  17  ;  Ixv.  1-lxvi.  14. 
6  xlii.  1-7  ;  xliii.  10;  xliv.  26  ;  xlix.  1-9  ;  1.  4-10  ;  lii.  13-liii.  12. 


228  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

fraction  in  an  ideal  light,  but  it  has  for  him  a  real  ex- 
istence, so  that  it  is  equally  wrong  to  hold  that  the 
servant  of  Jehovah  is  only  an  ideal  people,  as  opposed 
to  the  real  people.  Finally,  since  the  faithful  portion 
of  the  people  possesses  certain  characteristics  and  fulfils 
in  part  the  mission  of  the  prophets,  the  servants  of  God 
par  excellence^  it  has  been  possible  to  maintain  with 
some  show  of  reason  that  the  servant  of  Jehovah  is  Isra- 
elitish  prophetism;  but  this  is  only  apparently  the 
case. 

Our  prophet,  to  whom  the  return  from  the  Exile  and 
the  restoration  of  Israel  are  equivalent  to  the  inaugu- 
ration of  the  Messianic  kingdom  and  universal  salva- 
tion, thinks  that  the  servant  of  Jehovah  will  contribute 
to  this  grand  end,  by  bringing  the  captives  forth  from 
prison,  1  by  bringing  back  the  remnant  of  Israel,  by  rais- 
ing up  the  tribes  of  Jacob,  and  by  distributing  among 
them  the  desolate  heritages. ^  He  will  contribute  to  the 
work  of  restoration  above  all  by  producing  among  the 
people  the  disposition  required,  that  God  may  grant  them 
forgiveness  and  salvation.  This  prophet,  in  fact,  like 
the  others,  insists  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  people  to 
turn  to  God,  and  practise  righteousness,  in  order  that  God 
may  be  able  to  forgive  them,  make  a  new  and  everlast- 
ing covenant  with  them,  and  bestow  upon  them  his 
blessings. 2  The  chief  office  of  the  servant  of  Jehovah 
is  to  serve  as  mediator  between  Israel  and  their  God  in 
establishing  this  covenant.*  For  the  old  covenant  has 
been  broken  through  the  sin  of  Israel,  who  are  like  a 

1  xlii.  7  ;  xlix.  9.  2  xlix.  6,  8. 

3  xliv.  22 ;  Iv.  1  ff.,  6  ff. ;  Ivi.  1  f.  ;  Iviii.  1  ff. ;  lix.  20. 
*  xlii.  6  :  xlix.  8. 


SECOND  PERIOD. —§  24.    SERVANT   OF   JEHOVAH.       229 

woman  divorced  by  her  husband.^  Jehovah,  in  his  great 
mercy,  is  ready  to  make  a  new  covenant  of  peace  with 
his  rejected  spouse. ^  But  she  must  be  equally  disposed 
thereto.  It  is  the  office  of  the  servant  of  Jehovah  to 
open  the  eyes  of  the  blind  people,^  to  bring  them  back 
to  God,  from  whom  they  have  departed;*  it  is  his 
office  also  to  stimulate  the  courage  of  those  who  are  not 
rebellious  but  downcast.^ 

That  he  may  fulfil  this  mission  God  has  clothed  him 
with  his  spirit ;  ^  he  has  given  him  a  ready  tongue ; 
he  has  waked  him  every  morning,  and  opened  his  ear 
that  he  may  docilely  hear  the  divine  instructions.''  He 
has  made  his  mouth  like  a  sharp  sword,  and  he  has 
made  him  a  sharpened  arrow. ^  Thus  prepared  the  ser- 
vant of  Jehovah  fulfils  his  ministry  with  docility,^  with 
gentleness  and  perseverance,^^  and  yet  this  ministry  is 
not  an  easy  matter;  it  seems  to  produce  no  effect. ^^ 
The  servant  of  Jehovah  is  despised  by  his  people,  he 
is  even  an  object  of  abhorrence  to  them.^^  Ug  endures 
persecutions  the  most  ignominious ;  but  he  bears  them 
patiently,  relying  on  the  assistance  of  God,  and  assured 
that  his  enemies  are  on  the  way  to  destruction. ^^  He 
knows  that  God  will  glorify  himself  in  him ;  ^^  he  knows 
that  he  is  honored  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah,  and  that  his 
God  is  his  strength, ^^  that  kings  will  rise  before  him 
and  princes  prostrate  themselves  at  his  feet.^^  This 
extraordinary  humiliation  of  the  servant  of  Jehovah  and 
his  glorious  exaltation,  so  unexpected  that  it  will  fill 

1 1.  1  ;  lix.  2.  2  liv.  1-10.  3  xlii.  7,  18  ff.  *  xlix.  6. 

5  xlii.  3  ;  1.  4.  6  xlii.  1.  M.  4  f .  8  xlix.  2. 

9 1.  5.  10  xlii.  3  f.  11  xlix.  4.  12  xlix.  7. 

13  1.  6-9.  14  xlix.  3.  15  xlix.  5.  le  xlix.  7. 


230  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

kings  with  astonishment,  are  also  described  in  lii. 
13-15,  i.e.  the  beginning  of  the  most  original  passage 
bearing  on  our  subject,  which,  however,  has  been  very 
variously  interpreted.  ^ 

The  prophet,  after  having  indicated  the  general  sub- 
ject that  he  is  going  to  treat,  — the  extreme  humiliation 
and  the  extraordinary  exaltation  of  the  servant  of  Jeho- 
vah, —  complains  that  such  preaching  has  generally  met 
with  unbelief  among  his  people. ^  Then  the  Israelites, 
guilty  but  repentant,  are  represented  as  speaking. 
They  first  testify  to  the  wretched  condition  of  the  ser- 
vant of  Jehovah:  he  is  like  a  weak  plant,  a  wretched 
shoot,  that  springs  from  a  parched  soil,^  or  like  a  man 
sick  Avith  a  horrible  disease.*  It  will  be  easy  to  un- 
derstand what  has  just  been  said,  and  what  is  said  a 
little  later,  ^  if  we  do  not  lose  sight  of  the  passages 
already  cited,  and  others  in  which  appears  the  express 
declaration  that  the  faithful  portion  of  Israel  endure 
contempt,  abuse,  persecution,  such  as  no  one  else  has  to 
endure,^  and  that  though  the  righteous  perish,  no  one 
lays  it  to  heart.'  But  what  is  new  is  that  the  guilty 
Israelites  recognize  that  the  servant  of  Jehovah  has 
borne  their  sufferings,  that  he  has  been  wounded  for 
their  sins,  and  smitten  for  their  iniquity,  and  that  the 
punishment  that  has  overtaken  him  procures  them  peace 
and  salvation.^  The  prophet,  speaking  in  his  turn,  be- 
ginning with  verse  7,  confirms  the  conviction  of  the 
guilty  people;  he,  too,  declares  that  the  servant  of 
Jehovah  has  been  smitten  for  the  sins  of  his  people, 
that  it  has  pleased  God  to  crush  him  with  suffering  in 

1  lii.  13-liii.  12.  2  nii.  1.  3  lui.  2.  *  liii.  8. 

6  liii.  7.  ^  xlix.  7  ;  1.  6  ff.  :  li.  7.  ^  lyii.  1.  s  im.  4-6. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  24.    SERVANT   OF   JEHOVAH.      231 

spite  of  his  innocence,  that  he  has  surrendered  his  life 
as  a  sacrifice  for  sin.^  These  sufferings,  willingly  ac- 
cepted, and  innocently  endured,  redound  to  the  pros- 
perity of  the  work  of  God  in  the  hands  of  his  servant. ^ 
With  this  work  we  are  already  acquainted.  But  it  is 
once  again  described;  it  consists  in  henceforth  making 
men  righteous  by  instruction,  and  bearing  their  iniqui- 
ties.^ Indeed,  if  the  servant  of  Jehovah  was  clothed 
with  the  divine  spirit  and  instructed  by  God,  that  he 
might  fulfil  his  high  mission,*  his  seed  will  enjoy  the 
same  privilege ;  the  spirit  of  God  will  rest  on  them,  and 
his  words  will  ever  be  in  their  mouths,^  evidently  in 
view  of  the  mission  that  will  hereafter  devolve  upon 
the  true  Israel.  But  the  sufferings  of  the  servant  of 
Jehovah  will  bring  the  sufferer  to  glory;  he  will  see  a 
posterity,  and  prolong  his  days;  freed  from  troubles  of 
soul,  he  will  feast  his  e^^es  on  the  success  of  his  work ; 
God  will  give  him  his  part  with  the  great,  he  will  share 
the  booty  with  the  strong.^  These  last  words  and  the 
parallel  passages  in  our  book ''  show  clearly  that  even 
in  this  remarkable  chapter,  in  which  one  at  times  be- 
lieves one's  self  on  evangelical  ground,  the  view  of 
the  Old  Testament  is  maintained,  and  that  here  also 
the  servant  of  Jehovah  is  a  collective  term  for  faithful 
Israel,  who,  after  having  innocently  endured  many 
sufferings,  and  thus  contributed  to  the  salvation,  the 
deliverance,  of  their  people,  will  enjoy  the  extraordi- 
nary glory,  greatness,  and  prosperity  of  the  same. 

The  above  result  finds  its   partial  confirmation  and 
explanation  in  chapter  Ixv.  vv.   8-10.     Here,   indeed, 

1  liii.  8-10.  2  liii,  10.  3  liii.  11.  4  xlii.  1  ;  xlix.  2 ;  1.  4  f. 

5  lix.  21.  6  liii.  10-12.  7  xlix.  7  ;  lii.  15. 


232  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Israel  is  compared  to  a  cluster  of  grapes,  which  is  not  to 
be  destroyed  on  account  of  the  juice  that  it  contains. 
"I  will  do  thus,"  says  Jehovah,  "for  the  sake  of  my 
servants,  in  order  that  all  may  not  be  destroyed.  I 
will  cause  my  posterity  to  come  forth  from  Jacob,  and 
from  Judah  an  heir  to  my  mountains ;  my  chosen  shall 
possess  the  country,  and  my  servants  dwell  in  it. 
Sharon  shall  serve  as  pasture  for  the  flocks,  and  the 
valley  of  Achor  as  an  abode  for  the  herds,  for  my  people 
who  shall  have  sought  me."  Thus  the  faithfulness  of 
a  portion  of  Israel  will  prevent  God  from  destroying 
the  entire  nation.  The  gross  sinners,  the  idolaters, 
the  impenitent,  will  doubtless  be  exterminated. ^  But 
those  who  seek  God,  after  having  confessed  their  faults 
will  be  saved  for  the  sake  of  the  faithful  portion  of 
Israel,  and  with  them.  And  salvation  will  consist  in 
the  possession  of  the  country  and  great  material 
prosperity. 

We  have  seen  that  the  servant  of  Jehovah  fulfils 
his  mission,  in  part  at  least,  by  his  sufferings,  by  be- 
coming an  expiatory  victim,  both  in  the  eyes  of  the 
people  and  in  the  eyes  of  God.  He  gives  to  the  offended 
God  the  satisfaction  that  is  due  him,  and  procures 
for  the  guilty  and  repentant  people  assurance  of  the 
forgiveness  of  God.  Hence  the  establishment  of  a  new 
covenant  between  Israel  and  their  God  becomes  possible, 
and  in  consequence  of  this  covenant  of  peace  and  sal- 
vation, the  deliverance  and  restoration  of  Israel  also.  It 
should  be  observed  that  the  prophet  gives  the  promise 
of  the  covenant  immediately  after  having  shown  in 
chapter  liii.  that  the  sins  of  the  people  have  been  expi- 
1  Ixv.  11  ff. ;  comp.  vv.  b-1 ;  Ixvi.  4-6,  14,  17,  24 ;  1.  11. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  25.    RETRIBUTION.  238 

ated.i     To  the  thought  of  the  prophet  there  was  evi- 
dently a  real  connection  between  these  two  ideas. 

How  did  deutero-Isaiah  attain  this  original  idea,  that 
the  faithful  part  of  Israel  atones  for  the  sins  of  the 
unfaithful  portion  ?  It  meets,  in  reality,  a  want  that 
must  have  made  itself  keenly  felt  in  the  land  of  exile. 
It  was  not  possible  to  offer  to  Jehovah  victims  to  ap- 
pease him,  and  to  obtain  his  forgiveness  there,  far  from 
the  only  lawful  sanctuary.  How  then  was  assurance  of 
his  forgiveness  to  be  obtained?  This  was  possible  if 
the  faithful  part  of  Israel  was  regarded  as  an  expiatory 
victim.  Now  this  conception  would  naturally  enough 
present  itself  to  the  mind  of  the  prophet.  It  was 
always  believed  in  Israel  that  faults  could  be  expiated 
by  persons  other  than  those  who  committed  them. 
Thus  the  family  of  Korah,  and  that  of  Achan  had  to 
expiate  the  faults  committed  by  their  heads  ;2  the 
people  Israel  had  to  suffer  for  the  faults  of  King  David  ^ 
and  King  Manasseh ;  ^  and  the  descendants  of  Saul  for 
that  of  their  ancestor.^  We  have  already  seen  that,  as 
a  rule,  the  Israelites  believed  that  the  merit  and  the  de- 
merit of  one  person  or  generation  could  be  imputed  to 
another,  and  those  of  one  part  of  the  community  to  the 
entire  community. 

§  25.    EETKIBUTION  AND  THEODICY. 

It  clearly  follows  from  the  above,  and  from  a  consid- 
eration of  all  the  docuraents  of  the  first  two  periods, 
that  the  Israelites  believed  only  in  an  earthly  retri- 

1  liv.  1-10.  2  ;N"uin.  xvi.  25  ff.  ;  Josh.  7.  3  2  Sam.  xxiv. 

*  2  Kings  xxiii.  26  ;  xxiv.  3  f. ;  Jer.  xv.  4.  5  2  Sam.  xxi.  1-14. 


234  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

bution  for  human  actions.  There  is  not,  in  the  writings 
of  the  prophets,  where  the  punishment  of  sin  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  hope  of  future  salvation  on  the  other, 
play  so  great  a  part,  the  least  trace  of  the  idea  that  sin 
can  be  punished  and  virtue  rewarded  in  another  life. 
According  to  the  general  opinion  of  the  Hebrews  God 
rewards  good  and  punishes  evil  in  this  world;  all  mis- 
fortune is  a  divine  penalty,  incurred  by  unfaithfulness, 
and  all  blessing  a  divine  reward,  merited  by  faithful- 
ness ;  in  a  word,  there  is  an  exact  ratio  between  mis- 
fortune and  guilt,  between  happiness  and  merit. 

For  a  long  time  these  conceptions  seem  to  have 
aroused  no  serious  opposition ;  for  there  is  none  to  be 
met  in  the  oldest  documents.  But  in  proportion  as  the 
events  of  individual  life  and  of  history  were  more 
clearly  observed,  and  more  thoughtfully  studied,  it  was 
perceived  that  experience  constantly  contradicted  this 
theory  of  retribution,  that  many  who  were  wicked  were 
happy,  and  many  who  were  righteous  were  unhappy. 
Hence  arose  great  perplexity  for  the  one  who  did  not 
close  his  eyes  to  evidence,  a  snare  that  might  cause  be- 
lie v^ers  to  stumble,  and  throw  them  into  doubt. ^  This 
difficulty  made  itself  felt  especially  from  the  Exile 
onAvard.2  Yvoni  that  time  also  the  most  serious  efforts 
were  made  to  overcome  it. 

Perhaps  the  difficulty  had  been  perceived  at  an  earlier 
date,  and  the  attempt  had  been  made  to  relieve  it  by 
saying  that  God  visits  the  faults  of  fathers  upon  their 

1  Comp.  Isa.  V.  18-20. 

2  Jer.  xii.  1  ff. ;  xviii.  20  ;  xx.  18 ;  Hab.  i.  2  ff.,  13  ff.  ;  Ezek.  xviii. 
25,  29  ;  xxxiii.  17,  20  ;  Isa.  xl.  27  ;  Iviii.  3  ;  Mai.  iii.  13  ff. ;  Ps.  x.  1  ff.  ; 
XXXV.  17  ff.  ;  xliv.  17-26  ;  Ixxiii.  1-14 :  xciv.  1  ff. 


SECOND   PERIOD.  —  §  25.    RETRIBUTION.  235 

children,  and  that  he  rewards  children  for  the  faithful- 
ness of  their  ancestors.^  It  must  be  admitted  that  this 
principle  finds  support  in  the  laws  of  solidarity  and 
heredity  observed  in  the  experience  of  every  day:  chil- 
dren do  often  suffer  for  the  faults  of  their  parents,  or 
profit  by  their  virtues.  This  principle  is  especially 
true  when  it  is  applied  to  an  entire  people  considered 
collectively,  as  for  example,  the  people  Israel,  since 
succeeding  generations  generally  suffer  for  the  faults 
of  those  preceding. 

But  this  comparatively  early  opinion  also  aroused  ob- 
jections, and  gave  occasion  for  the  sarcastic  proverb, 
"the  fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes,  and  the  sons'  teeth 
have  been  set  on  edge. "  ^  It  was  opposed  by  the  thought 
that  each  bore  the  penalty  of  his  own  sin.^  Thus  the 
traditional  standpoint  was  maintained,  and  an  explana- 
tion that  at  least  relieved  the  difficulty  raised  by  it,  dis- 
carded. But  how  was  this  difficulty  from  that  time 
forward  to  be  solved?  It  was  taught  that  man  has 
no  right  to  contend  with  God,  the  creature  with  the 
creator,  the  work  with  him  who  made  it;  ^  it  was 
asserted  that  man,  far  from  being  righteous,  is  in 
reality  guilty;^  or  perhaps  it  was  maintained  that 
the  happiness  of  the  wicked  is  only  fleeting,  and  always 
comes  to  an  unhappy  end,  while  the  misfortune  of  the 
righteous  can  only  be  temporary;^    in  some  passages 

1  Ex.  XX.  5  f.  ;  Dent,  v.  9  f.  ;  comp.  Hos,  iv.  6  ;  Jer.  xxxii.  18. 

2  Jer.  xxxi.  29  ;  Ezek.  xviii.  2. 

3  Jer.  xxxi.  30  ;  Ezek.  xviii.  3  ff. ;  xxxiii.  10-20  ;  Deut.  xxiv.  16 ; 
2  Kings  xiv.  6.  *  Isa.  xxix.  16  ;  xlv.  9  f.  ;  Jer.  xviii.  6. 

5  Ezek.  xviii.  29  ff.  ;  xxxiii.  17  ff. ;  Isa.  Iviii.  3  ff. 

6  Ps.  Ixxiii.  16-24 ;  ix.  17  f. ;  xxxvii.  ;  xlix.  ;  Iv.  22  f.  ;  Ixiv.  ;  xciv. 
8-23  ;  Prov.  xxiii.  17  f. 


236      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

there  appears  even  the  higher  idea  that  misfortune  has 
a  salutary  elfect  upon  man,  like  that  of  correction  upon 
the  child ;  ^  finally,  in  deutero-Isaiah,  occurs  the  thought 
that  the  righteous  may  be  called  to  suffer  for  the  guilty, 
and  thus  save  these  latter  from  merited  chastisements/^ 
It  may  well  be  that  the  explanation  of  chapter  liii.  of 
Isaiah  should  be  sought  in  part  in  the  preconceptions  to 
which  the  question  of  retribution  gave  rise  at  the  time 
of  the  Exile.  Have  we  not  in  this  chapter  a  new  solu- 
tion of  the  problem?  The  faithful  portion  of  Israel 
suffered  innocently :  how  are  these  sufferings  to  be  ex- 
plained from  the  Israelitish  standpoint,  according  to 
which  misfortune  and  sin,  happiness  and  righteousness, 
always  balance  each  other?  They  are  explained  on  the 
supposition  that  the  faithful  portion  of  Israel  expiate 
the  sins  of  the  unfaithful. 

The  problem  of  which  we  are  speaking  engrossed 
and  perplexed  Israelitish  thinkers  to  such  a  degree  that 
one  of  them  felt  the  need  of  giving  it  thorough  treat- 
ment, and  making  it  the  subject  of  an  entire  book,  — 
that  of  Job.  The  following  is  a  rough  outline  of  the 
contents  in  their  connection  of  this  theodicy  of  the  Old 
Testament.  Righteous  Job  is  overtaken  by  great  mis- 
fortunes though  he  has  not  deserved  them,  solely  that 
his  piety  may  be  tested. ^  Here,  therefore,  is  experi- 
ence, in  the  person  of  Job,  protesting  against  the  old 
theory  of  retribution.  In  the  long  conversations  that 
take  place  between  him  and  his  friends.  Job  gives  utter- 
ance to  doubts  concerning  Providence,  because  he  sees 
himself  unjustly  and  severely  punished.      The   three 

1  Prov.  iii.  11  f.  ;  Deut.  viii.  2-5 ;  Lam.  iii.  27-30. 

2  Isa.  liii.  3  Chaps,  i.  f. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  25.   RETRIBUTION.  237 

friends  dispute  this  claim,  and  seek  to  convince  Job 
that  he  has  deserved  these  misfortunes  by  which  he  is 
smitten,  thus  maintaining  the  traditional  opinion  con- 
cerning retribution.  But  he,  sure  of  his  innocence,  de- 
fends it  tenaciously,  and  successfully  repels  all  the 
objections  of  his  friends.^  Elihu,  a  fourth  friend,  who 
has  thus  far  remained  silent,  now  takes  up  the  discus- 
sion. ^  He  also  declares  that  Job  is  not  perfectly  inno- 
cent, and  reproaches  him  with  his  doubts  concerning 
divine  Providence,  "who  rendereth  to  man  according 
to  his  works,  and  causeth  him  to  find  according  to  his 
ways."^  On  this  point  he  shares  the  traditional  opinion 
defended  by  the  other  three  friends.  But  the  ncAV  feat- 
ures in  his  discourse  are  his  representation  of  afflictions 
as  a  means  of  trying  and  correcting  man,*  and  his  con- 
tention that  God  is  much  too  great  for  a  feeble  mortal 
to  be  able  to  comprehend  his  ways.^  This  latter  point 
is  taken  up  and  developed  more  at  length  by  God  him- 
self, who  replies  to  Job  from  the  midst  of  the  tempest, 
and  calls  his  attention  to  the  wonders  of  nature.^ 
Finally  Job  confesses  that  he  does  not  at  all  understand 
the  Avorks  of  God,  and  admits  that  man  must  humbly 
submit  to  the  incomprehensible  purposes  of  the  Al- 
mighty." In  the  epilogue^  God  declares  that  the  first 
three  friends  have  spoken  less  worthily  of  him  than 
Job,  evidently  because  they  have  maintained  the  old 
theory  of  retribution,  opposed  by  the  latter. 

It  is  clear  that  the  object  of  the  book  of  Job  is  to 
refute  this  theory.     It  shows  that  the  righteous  man 

1  Chaps,  iii.-xxxi.       2  Chaps,  xxxii.  ff.        ^  xxxiv.  5  ff. ;  xxxv.  1  ff. 
*  xxxiii.  14-30  ;  xxxvi.  7-15.  ^  xxxvi.  22-xxxvii.  24. 

6  Chaps,  xxxviii.-xli.         "^  xlii,  1-6.  ^  xlii.  7  ff. 


238  THEOLOGY   OF    THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

may  also  be  overtaken  by  great  ills,  since  they  are  not 
necessarily  merited  penalties,  but  may  be  simply  a 
means  of  testing  his  piety,  as  the  prologue  asserts  of 
the  afflictions  of  Job.  The  book  further  means  to  assert 
that  it  is  rash  in  man  to  contend  with  God  and  wish  to 
understand  his  ways,  that  the  highest  human  wisdom 
consists  in  fearing  God  and  fleeing  evil.^  Finally, 
according  to  the  epilogue,  the  man  who  remains  faith- 
ful to  God,  even  in  the  midst  of  trial,  w411  again  be 
delivered  and  blessed  with  peculiar  favor.^  The  dis- 
courses of  Elihu,  which,  according  to  many  critics, 
originally  formed  no  part  of  the  book,  add  the  idea  that 
afflictions  are  salutary  for  man,  because  they  help  to 
rid  him  of  his  faults,  and  save  him  from  the  penalties 
that  these  faults  would  bring  upon  him.  Oehler  says 
of  the  book  of  Job  that  it  presents  at  the  same  time  all 
the  problems  that  ever  engaged  the  minds  of  wise  Isra- 
elites, and  all  the  solutions  of  them  that  they  proposed.^ 
This  is  true  at  all  events  of  problems  of  theodicy  and 
retribution.  All  the  solutions  that  it  proposes  on  this 
subject  are,  in  fact,  found  in  other  isolated  passages 
which  have  been  cited. 

Submission  and  resignation,  even  when  one  does  not 
comprehend  the  ways  of  God,  —  such  is  the  last  word 
of  Israelitish  wisdom,  respecting  the  important  problem 
under  discussion.  But  to  submit  without  hope,  to 
submit  without  the  hope  of  ever  comprehending,  of  one 
day  seeing  fall  the  veil  that  hides  the  ways  of  divine 
Providence,  — this  cannot  satisfy  the  human  mind  and 
heart.  We  feel  the  need  of  knowing  the  object  of  life 
and  of  the  world,  the  need  of  knowing  that  God  does 
everything  for  the  best. 

1  xxviii.  28.  ^  xlii.  10-17.  ^  §  247. 


SECOND  PERIOD.  —  §  25.   KETKIBUTION.  239 

The  book  of  Job  shows  clearly  that,  on  the  prime 
question  of  life,  the  view  of  Israelitish  wisdom  and 
prophetism  is  unsatisfactory,  and  that  it  must  be  sup- 
plemented by  a  loftier  view,  by  the  evangelical  view, 
which  opens  the  prospect  of  an  eternal  life  and  retribu- 
tion. The  thought  of  the  future  life,  and  the  consola- 
tion that  flows  from  it  in  misfortune,  presented  itself, 
indeed,  to  the  mind  of  our  author.  ^  But  he  did  not 
dare  dwell  on  it.  It  appeared  to  him  as  a  pious  desire, 
and  not  as  a  well  grounded  hope. 

1  xiv.  14. 


THIRD   PERIOD. 


§  26.    HOLY  SOKIPTUEE. 

We  have  seen  that,  in  the  first  period,  traditional 
ideas  and  usages  exercised  a  preponderating  influence, 
and  that  in  the  second,  prophetism  sought  to  obtain  such 
an  influence  by  opposing  the  idolatrous  or  superstitious 
errors  and  usages  of  the  past;  in  the  third  period  we 
see  formed  a  collection  of  sacred  books,  which  hence- 
forward constitutes  the  supreme  authority  in  matters  of 
faith,  the  fundamental  basis  of  the  religious,  moral, 
and  even  national  life  of  the  Jews^  as  the  remnants  of 
the  ancient  people  Israel  are  called  after  the  Exile. 

The  first  reference  to  sacred  writings  is  in  document 
A,  which  tells  us  of  two  tables  of  stone  containing  the 
decalogue,^  and  a  book  of  the  covenant  containing  the 
words,  the  statutes,  of  Jehovah,  written  by  Moses. ^  But 
these  references  have  not  a  well  established  historical 
character,  and  we  find  no  certain  traces  of  a  part  played 
and  an  influence  exerted  by  these  documents.  The 
prophets,  who  always  preach  in  the  name  of  Jehovah, 
never  appeal  to  a  written  law  even  when  they  employ 
the  term  torah^  which  is  ordinarily  translated  law^ 
but  which  denotes  rather  prophetic  or  other  oral  teach- 

1  Ex.  xxiv.  12  ;  xxxi.  18 ;  xxxii.  15  f.  ;  xxxiv.  1,  4,  28. 

2  Ex.  xxiv.  4,  7. 

241 


242  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

ing.^  A  single  passage,  Hos.  viii.  12,  where  there  is 
probably  an  allusion  to  the  passages  cited  from  docu- 
ment A,  mentions  the  statutes  of  the  law  of  Jehovah 
written  by  himself. 

We  find  no  historical  trace  of  a  second  book  until 
toward  the  Exile.  We  learn  from  2  Kings  xxii.  f.  that, 
in  the  eighteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Josiah,  there  was 
discovered  in  the  temple,  where  it  was  the  practice  to 
deposit  writings  of  an  official  character, ^  a  book  of  the 
law  and  the  covenant,  which  was  certainly  the  legal  and 
more  important  part  of  Deuteronomy.  As  soon  as  the 
king  had  made  himself  acquainted  with  the  contents 
of  this  book  he  caused  it  to  be  read  to  all  the  people. 
We  see  from  the  account  that  has  been  preserved  to  us 
that  no  such  thing  had  ever  before  been  done,  that  it 
was  new  to  every  one.  It  is  this  book  to  which  refer- 
ence is  made,  1  Kings  ii.  3 ;  2  Kings  xiv.  6  and  xxi. 
8.  It  is  not  probable  that  from  this  time  forth  the  law 
was  regularly  read  before  the  people,  for  if  it  had  been 
we  could  not  comprehend  the  profound  ignorance  of  it, 
and  the  flagrant  transgressions  against  it  that  show 
themselves  in  the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  among 
all  the  Jews,  even  the  chief  of  them.^ 

Ezra  probably  contributed  most  to  the  formation  of 
the  Pentateuch,  which  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  bears  ^he 
title  Laio^  and  he  seems  to  have  given  the  first  impulse 
to  a  regular  reading  of  this  portion  of  Scripture.  He  is 
represented  to  us  as  a  scribe  versed  in  the  law,  diligent 
in  studying  it,  in  putting  it  into  practice,  and  in  teach- 

1  Keuss,  Gesch.,  §  261  ;  [W.  R.  Smith,  Old  Test.,  pp.  292  ff.]. 

2  1  Sam.  X.  25  ;  Deut.  xxxi.  26. 

5  Ezra  ix.  1  f .  ;  x.  18 ;  Neli.  v.  1-5  ;  viii.  13  ;  xiii.  4-31. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  26.    HOLY   SCRIPTURE.  243 

ing  it  to  the  people.^  He  trained  other  teachers  of  the 
law  that  they  miglit  be  able  to  explain  it.^  He  caused 
the  priests,  the  Levites,  and  the  leaders  of  the  people 
to  solemnly  swear  that  the  law  should  be  observed. ^ 
He  made  them  sign  a  written  covenant,  based  on  this 
promise,  after  having  read  and  explained  to  them  the 
contents  of  the  law.*  According  to  this  we  may  sup- 
pose that  Ezra  was  the  promoter  of  public  and  regular 
readings  of  the  law ;  ^  it  was,  moreover,  the  only  means 
of  making  it  known  to  all,  in  accordance  with  certain 
directions  of  Deuteronomy,^  and  an  injunction  of  the 
last  prophet,  a  contemporary  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.^ 
At  that  time  it  was  not  possible  for  the  great  majority 
of  private  individuals  to  own  a  copy  of  the  law.  We 
find  here,  further,  the  starting  point  for  the  worship  of 
the  synagogues,  which  consisted  chiefly  in  the  reading 
and  explanation  of  the  law.  In  the  apostolic  age  a  syn- 
agogue existed  wherever  there  was  a  Jewish  community 
of  any  size,  and  the  practice  of  reading  Moses  every 
Sabbath  was  very  ancient.^ 

From  the  time  of  Ezra  onward,  i.e.  after  the  middle 
of  the  fifth  century  before  our  era,  the  law  of  Moses, ^ 
or  the  law  of  Jehovah,  ^^  which  henceforth  or  soon  after- 
wards we  find  identified  with  the  Pentateuch,  was  the 
supreme  authority  in  matters  of  faith :  it  is  styled  holy 
and  reverend ;  ^^  an  infinite  value  is  attributed  to  it,  for  it 
is  regarded  as  the  source  of  life ;  ^^  it  is  called  the  incor- 

1  Ezravii.  6,  10  f.,  21.  2  Xeh.  viii.  13,  7-9.  ^  Ezra  x.  3-5. 

*  Neh.  viii.  -x.  ^  Neh.  xiii.  1. 

6  vi.  6  f .  ;  xi.  18-20  ;  xxxi.  9-13.  "^  Mai.  iv.  4. 

8  Acts  XV.  21  ;  comp.  2  Cor.  iii.  15. 

9  Ezra  iii.  2  ;  vi.  18  ;  Neh.  viii.  1.  ^^  Ezra  vii.  10. 
11  2  Mace.  vi.  23,  28.                    12  Bar.  iv.  1 ;  Tob.  i.  6. 


244  THEOLOGY  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

ruptible  light ;  ^  it  is  believed  to  be  able  to  communicate 
supreme  wisdom;^  its  regulations  are  observed  in  the 
most  scrupulous  manner ;  ^  death  is  preferred  to  trans- 
gression against  it;*  private  individuals  even  possess 
copies  of  it;^  great  attachment  to  it  is  displayed,  the 
idea  being  that  this  is  the  most  sacred  duty  that  can  be 
performed.^  The  greatest  favor  that  the  conquerors 
of  Palestine  can  grant  the  Jews  is  permission  to  live 
according  to  the  regulations  of  the  law ;  ^  and  it  is  the 
prohibition  of  the  observance  of  the  law,  and  the  decree 
that  it  be  transgressed,  which  rouse  the  Jews  against 
their  oppressors  in  the  days  of  the  Maccabees.  Later, 
in  the  midst  of  Judaism,  it  is  all  regarded  as  a  direct 
revelation  from  God.  It  is  declared  that  he  who  claims 
that  it  did  not  come  from  heaven,  will  have  no  part  in 
the  world  to  come ;  that  he  who  says  that  Moses  added 
a  single  word  of  his  own  knowledge,  denies  and  despises 
the  word  of  God.^ 

To  this  first  and  oldest  collection  of  the  Hebrew 
Bible,  the  Law,  was  afterward  attached  a  second,  the 
Prophets^  which  was  divided  into  the  former  and  the 
latter  prophets.  The  former  include  the  historical 
books  of  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings;  the  latter, 
the  prophetical  books  properly  so  called.,  i.e.  all  the 
books  that  we  call  prophetical,  excepting  Daniel. 

1  Wis.  xviii.  4.  2  gir.  xxiv.  23-29 ;  xxxix.  1  ff.  ;  Bar.  iii.  12. 

3  Ezra  iii.  2  ;  vii.  10,  23 ;  x.  3  ;  Neh.  viii.  U  ff.  ;  x.  29 ;  xii.  44  ; 
xiii.  3  ;  1  Mace.  iii.  56  ;  iv.  47  ;  2  Mace.  iii.  1  ;  vi.  23. 

^  1  Mace.  i.  56  ff.  ;  ii.  29  ff.  ;  2  Mace.  vii.  s  1  Mace.  i.  57. 

6  1  Mace.  ii.  19-22,  26-28,  46-48 ;  iii.  21  ;  iv.  42  ;  vi.  59  ;  xiii.  3 ; 
xiv.  29  ;  2  Mccc.  xiii.  10  f.  ;  Ps.  exix.  "'  1  Mace.  vi.  59  ;  x.  37. 

8  Sehiirer,  The  Jewish  People  in  the  Time  of  Jesus  Christy  Div.  II. 
Vol.  I.  p.  307. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §26.    EOLY   SCRIPTURE.  245 

The  latest  prophets  begin  to  allude  to  the  preaching 
of  the  earliest.  1  When  in  still  later  times  prophets 
ceased  to  arise  among  the  Jews,  to  the  great  grief  of 
the  people, 2  there  was  felt  the  need  of  collecting  the 
extant  prophetical  writings,  that  it  might  be  possible  to 
consult  the  teaching  contained  in  them,  and  to  possess 
the  complete  word  of  God,  which  was  early  divided  in 
law  and  prophets.^  According  to  2  Mace.  ii.  13,  the 
formation  of  a  collection  of  prophetical  books  dates  from 
Nehemiah,  and  it  seems  to  follow,  from  Sir.  xliv.  -xlix., 
that  when  this  book  was  written,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  second  century  before  our  era,  the  first  two,  and  the 
principal,  parts  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  above  mentioned, 
already  existed.  The  collection  of  the  prophets,  it  is 
true,  did  not  at  once  enjoy  the  same  authority,  and 
never  played  the  same  part  among  the  Jews  as  the  law. 
Yet  as  early  as  about  130  before  our  era,  the  translator 
of  Sirach,  in  his  preface,  places  the  law  and  the  proph- 
ets upon  the  same  level,  and  shows  that  the  author,  his 
grandfather,  was  acquainted  with  other  books  of  the 
fathers  besides  these  two  collections. 

These  last  also  doubtless  had  a  sacred  character,  and 
probably  at  its  formation  became  parts  of  the  third 
collection  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  which  bears  the  title 
Scriptures^  a  word  which  among  the  church  fathers  is 
rendered  Hagiographa^  i.e.  sacred  Scriptures.  We  need 
not  dwell  longer  on  this  third  collection,  which, 
even  in  the  apostolic  age,  does  not  seem  to  have  become 
part  of  the  canon,  at  least  in  its  whole  extent.     In  the 

1  Ezek.  xxxviii.  17  ;  Zech.  i.  4 ;  vii.  7,  12. 

2  1  Mace.  iv.  46 ;  ix.  27  ;  xiv.  41  ;  Ps.  Ixxiv.  9. 

3  Zech.  vii.  12  ;  Neh.  ix.  26. 


246      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

New  Testament,  Scripture  is  simply  called  "  the  law  and 
the  prophets,"  or  "Moses  and  the  prophets."^  Once 
only  mention  is  made  of  the  Psalms  along  with  the  law 
of  Moses  and  the  prophets. ^ 

The  letter  of  Scripture  then,  among  the  Jews,  was  the 
su^^reme  authority  in  matters  of  faith,  the  source  and 
norm  of  religious  teaching,  and  even  of  civil  law,  which 
among  them  as  among  the  early  Israelites  had  an  essen- 
tially religious  and  theocratic  character.  We  find 
traces  of  the  use  that  was  made  of  Scripture  for  the 
instruction  and  edification  of  the  faithful  even  in  a 
number  of  psalms  ;2  we  find  them  especially  in  the 
Apocrypha.*  Appeal  was  made  to  sacred  texts  as  to  a 
divine  authority ;  ^  recourse  was  had  to  them  as  to  the 
best  source  of  consolation.^ 

The  Jews,  as  we  perceive,  became  "the  men  of  one 
book."  In  the  place  of  prophets  they  had  scribes  and 
doctors  of  the  law,  interpreters  of  the  sacred  code; 
biblical  texts  and  exegesis,  therefore,  took  the  place  of 
vital  inspiration. 

1  Matt.  V.  17  ;  vii.  12  ;  xi.  13  ;  xxii.  40  ;  Luke  xvi.  16,  29,  31 ;  xxiv. 
27;  John  i.  46  ;  Acts  xxiv.  14  ;  xxviii.  23  ;  Rom.  iii.  21. 

2  Luke  xxiv.  44. 

*  Ixxviii. ;  Ixxxix. ;  xcv.  ;  cv. ;  cvi.  ;  cxiv.  ;  cxxxii.  ;  cxxxvi. 

♦  Sir.  xvi.  7  ff.  ;  xvii.  1  ff.  ;  xxxviii.  5;  xl.  10;  xliv. -xlix.  ;  Wis. 
X.  -xii.  ;  xvi.-xix.  ;  1  Mace.  ii.  52  ff.  ;  iv.  9,  30 ;  vii.  41  ;  2  Mace.  vii. 
G  ;  viii.  19  ;  xii.  15  ;  xv.  9,  22  ;  Judith  v.  6  ff. 

5  2  Chron.  xvii.  9 ;  xxiii.  18 ;  xxv.  4  ;  Ezra  i.  1  ;  iii.  2  ff.  ;  vi.  18  ; 
Neh.  viii.  1 ;  Dan.  ix.  2,  11  ;  Bar.  ii.  2,  20-24,  28  f.  ;  Tob.  i.  6  ;  ii.  5  f . ; 
viii.  5  f . ;  xiv.  4  f .  ;  1  Mace.  vii.  16  ft. 

6  1  Mace.  xii.  9. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  27.    THE   DOCTRINE   OF   GOD.      247 

§  27.     THE  DOOTEINE   OF   GOD. 

The  idea  of  God  is  in  many  respects  the  same  among 
the  Jews  as  among  the  Israelites,  and  the  literature  of 
the  third  period  contains,  with  regard  to  it  as  with  re- 
gard to  so  many  other  things,  views  that  we  have 
encountered  in  the  oldest  literature.  It  is  doubtless 
useless  for  us  to  dwell  on  them  a  second  time.  It  will 
suffice  to  notice  anything  new,  characteristic,  that  this 
period  has  to  offer. 

First  of  all  we  must  remark  the  decisive  triumph  of 
monotheism.  Down  to  the  Exile,  idolatry  was  often 
practised  by  the  people  and  even  by  their  leaders ;  after 
the  Exile,  it  completely  and  forever  disappears  from 
the  midst  of  the  Jewish  nation.  This  is  easy  of  com- 
prehension. The  Babylonian  captivity  was  regarded 
as  a  just  punishment  for  past  unfaithfulnesses,  and 
particularly  of  the  greatest  of  all,  idolatry.  It  was, 
moreover,  the  most  zealous  among  the  Jews,  those  most 
attached  to  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  who  returned  from 
the  Exile,  and  in  the  beginning  formed  a  little  nucleus, 
clustered  about  Jerusalem,  and  having  at  its  head  a 
large  proportion  of  priests.  Many  of  the  reforms  that 
had  previously  been  attempted  in  vain,  under  these  cir- 
cumstances and  from  this  moment  became  possible.  Now 
the  fundamental  reform  was  the  decisive  triumph,  over 
all  idolatry,  of  faith  in  the  only  true  God,  creator  of 
heaven  and  earth,  supreme  ruler  and  preserver  of  the 
entire  world. 

A  second  point  to  emphasize,  with  respect  to  the 
Jews,  is  their  speculative  tendency.  In  the  writings 
of  the  prophets,  especially  the  older,  all  is  spontaneous ; 


248  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

the  pure  expression  of  life,  of  an  intense  and  profound 
religious  faith.  It  is  feeling  and  imagination  that 
dominate  in  their  discussions.  It  is  the  richness  of 
religious  and  moral  life  that  gives  them  their  value. 
Among  the  Jewish  people,  on  the  contrary,  and  espe- 
cially among  their  spiritual  leaders,  life  and  feeling  are 
eclipsed  by  reflection,  prophetism  gives  place  to  rabbin- 
ism,  ins]3iration  to  speculation.  The  doctors  who  suc- 
ceed the  prophets  strive  much  more  after  the  possession 
and  dissemination  of  correct  conceptions  of  God  than 
the  cultivation  of  life  in  God ;  they  undertake  to  elabo- 
rate a  genuine  doctrine  of  God,  a  complete  system  of 
theolog}^  which  the  prophets  never  tried  to  do. 

In  the  translation  of  the  Seventy,  and  in  the  Targums 
or  commentaries  for  which  we  are  indebted  to  the  old 
Jewish  doctors,  the  sense  of  passages  is  often  warped, 
for  the  sake  of  removing  whatever  was  too  offensive  in 
the  theophanies  and  anthropomorphisms  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament.^ This  tendency  is  particularly  prominent  in 
Philo  and  other  Jewish  thinkers  of  Alexandria,  who 
were  influenced  by  Greek  philosophy.^  But  it  is  of 
much  older  date.  We  find  the  first  traces  of  it  in  bib- 
lical literature.  There  also  is  seen  a  disposition  to 
exalt  God  infinitely  above  all  that  is  earthly,  human, 
and  imperfect,  even  above  all  human  conception. ^ 
This  extraordinary  exaltation  of  the  Deity  is  ex- 
pressed by  calling  him  God  of  the  heavens,^  or  simply 

1  Nicolas,  Doctrines  relig.  des  Jidfs,  pp.  147  ff.  ;  Stapfer,  Les  idees 
relifj.  en  Palestine,  2d  ed.,  pp.  31  ff.  ;  [Toy,  Judaism  and  Christianity, 
p.  87].  2  Nicolas,  pp.  161  ff. 

3  Eccl.  iii.  14  ;  v.  2  ;  vii.  13  ;  xi.  5  ;  Sir.  xlii.  21  ;  xliii.  27  ff. 

4  Jon.  i.  9  ;  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  23  ;  Ezra  i.  2  ;  v.  11  f.  ;  vi.  10  ;  vii.  12, 
21,  23  ;  Neh.  i.  4  f . ;  ii.  4,  20  ;  Eccl.  v.  2  ;  Dan.  ii.  18  f.,  37,  44  ;  iv.  37  ; 
V.  23 ;  Ps.  cxxxvi.  26 ;  etc. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  27.    THE   DOCTRINE   OF   GOD.      249 

Heaven,^  or  the  Supreme,  the  Most-High,  a  name  that 
occurs  on  every  page  of  Sirach,  but  which  we  also 
frequently  find  elsewhere. ^ 

From  the  idea  that  God  is  absolutely  incomprehen- 
sible and  infinitely  exalted  flows  the  other  that  man  can- 
not enter  into  direct  relations  with  him,  that  he  can 
neither  know  nor  tell  what  he  is,  that  consequently  he 
neither  can  nor  ought  to  pronounce  his  name.  Lev. 
xxiv.  16  says :  "  He  who  blasphemeth  the  name  of  Jeho- 
vah shall  be  punished  with  death."  The  Seventy,  on 
the  contrary,  translate :  "  He  who  pron ounce th  the  name 
of  the  Lord  shall  be  punished  with  death."  In  accord- 
ance with  this  principle  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  the  vowel 
points  of  the  divine  name  Adhonay  Lord  and,  in  cer- 
tain cases  those  of  the  divine  name  Mohim,  are  given  to 
the  word  Yhwh  in  order  that  the  proper  name  of  God 
may  not  be  pronounced  or  profaned.  Even  in  a  number 
of  canonical  documents  later  than  the  Exile,  like 
Chronicles,  when  they  do  not  follow  an  older  source, 
and  in  certain  of  the  psalms,  we  find  the  abstract  name 
Eloliim  preferred  where,  in  the  older  documents,  the 
name  Yahweh  is  generally  found. ^  In  the  first  book 
of  the  Psalms,^  which  contains  the  oldest  of  these  relig- 
ious songs,  the  name  Elohim  appears  only  fifteen  times 
and  Yahweh  272  times ;  while  in  the  second  book  ^  the 
name  Yahweh  occurs  only  thirty  times  and  Elohim  164 
times.     Ecclesiastes  uses  only  this  latter  name.     The 

1  Dan.  iv.  26 ;  1  Mace.  iii.  60  ;  iv.  10  ;  Mark  xi.  30  ;  Luke  xv.  18,  21. 

2  Eccl.  V.  7  ;  Dan.  iv.  17,  24  f.,  32,  34 ;  v.  18,  21  ;  vii.  18,  22,  25, 
27  ;  etc. 

3  1  Chron.  iv.  10  ;  v.  20,  25 ;  vi.  49  ;  xii.  22  ;  xiii.  12  ;  xiv.  10,  14, 
16  ;  xv.  15  ;  xvi.  1  ;  etc. ;  comp.  especially  Ps.  xiv.  2,  4  with  liii.  2,  4, 
and  xl.  13,  16  with  Ixx.  1,  4.         *  Ps.  i,  -xli.        ^  pg.  xlii.  -Ixxiii. 


250  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

later  book  of  Daniel,  except  in  the  ninth  chapter,  also 
carefully  avoids  the  use  of  the  name  YahweJi. 

This  idea  that  God  is  infinitely  exalted  above  the 
world,  and  without  direct  relations  with  it,  necessarily 
led  to  the  recognition  of  intermediate  beings  through 
whom  relations  might  be  made  possible.  Thus  arose 
the  doctrine  of  the  logos,  the  word  which  played  so 
important  a  part  first  in  Jewish  and  afterward  in 
Christian  theology.  It  took  shape  under  the  influence 
of  Greek  philosophy,  which  Philo  and  other  Alexan- 
drian Jews  sought  to  reconcile  with  the  biblical  teach- 
ing.^    But  its  roots  reach  into  the  Old  Testament. 

This  doctrine,  it  is  true,  is  not  found  wherever 
the  attempt  has  been  made  to  find  it.  Traditional 
theology,  which  claims  that  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity 
is  taught  throughout  the  Bible,  has  maintained  that 
the  spirit,  the  word,  and  the  wisdom  of  God  are,  in 
a  number  of  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  repre- 
sented as  hypostases  or  persons.  For  the  spirit  of  God 
it  finds  its  chief  support  in  Gen.  i.  2,  where,  at  the 
time  of  creation,  the  spirit  of  God  is  said  to  have  moved 
above  the  waters;  then  in  Isa.  xlviii.  16,  where  the 
prophet  declares  that  Jehovah  and  his  spirit  have  sent 
him;  finally  in  Isa.  Ixiii.  10,  where  it  is  asserted  that 
the  rebellious  Israelites  grieved  the  holy  spirit  of  God. 
Respecting  the  word  of  God,  the  most  decisive  pas- 
sages that  it  has  brought  forward  are  Isa.  Iv.  11,  which 
represents  the  word  of  God  as  executing  his  will  and 
fulfilling  his  purposes;  Ps.  xxxiii.  6,  which  declares 
that  the  heavens  were  made  by  the  word  of  Jehovah ; 
Ps.  cxlvii.  15,  which  says  that  the  word  of  God  runs 
1  Nicolas,  pp.  178  ff. ;  Stapfer,  pp.  39  ff.  ;    [Toy,  pp.  106  ff.]. 


THIRD   PERIOD. —  §  27.    THE   DOCTRINE   OF   GOD.      251 

swiftly.  As  for  the  wisdom  of  God,  two  passages 
have  been  preferred  as  citations:  Job  xxviii.  23  ff., 
where  God  seems  to  have  met  Avisdom  at  the  creation, 
and  Prov.  viii.  22  ff.,  where  wisdom  appears  as  the 
lirst  creature  taking  part  in  the  creation  of  all  the  rest, 
and  giving  joy  to  God. 

It  is  evident  that  in  these  passages  the  spirit  and  the 
word  of  God  are  personified,  but  that  these  personifi- 
cations must  be  placed  on  the  same  level  with  others  of 
the  same  kind.  Wisdom  alone  ajipears  as  a  veritable 
hypostasis,  not  in  the  trinitarian  sense,  for  in  the  pas- 
sage from  Proverbs  she  is  represented  as  a  creature  of 
God,  but  more  or  less  in  the  sense  of  the  Jewish  doc- 
trine of  the  logos,  which  would  harmonize  better  than 
the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  trinity  with  Israelitish 
monotheism. 

This  doctrine,  more  developed,  recurs  in  some  apoc- 
ryphal books.  In  the  book  of  Baruch,  and  in  that  of 
Sirach,  the  wisdom  of  God  does  not  as  yet  appear  very 
clearly  as  an  hypostasis ;  but  in  Wisdom  doubt  is  no  lon- 
ger possible.  In  imitation  of  Job  xxviii.  12  ff.,  the  book 
of  Baruch  says  that  men  generally  have  not  known  how 
to  find  wisdom, 1  but  that  God  knows  her;^  that  he  has 
given  her  to  Israel,  that  she  has  appeared  on  earth,  and 
that  she  has  remained  among  men ;  ^  that  she  has  exercised 
her  influence  upon  the  law.*  According  to  Sirach  she 
is  eternally  with  God.^  She  was  created  before  all 
things  else.^  God  created  her,  saw  her,  and  shed  her 
upon  all  his  works.'''  After  having  left  the  mouth  of 
the    Most-High,  and  having  sought  in  the  whole  uni- 

1  iii.  12-21.  2  i[i  32  ff.  3  iii.  35  f.  4  jy.  1. 

5  i.  1.  6  i,  4.  7  i.  9  f. 


252  THEOLOGY   OB"    THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

verse  a  place  of  rest,  a  stable  abode,  a  field  of  activity, 
the  creator  of  all  things  else,  and  also  of  wisdom, 
assigned  to  her  as  a  peculiar  abode  the  people  Israel, 
among  whom  she  rules,  prospers,  performs  her  work, 
officiating  in  the  sanctuary,  imbuing  the  law,  impart- 
ing instruction  as  prophecy.  ^  In  other  passages  wis- 
dom is  personified  in  the  same  way  as  in  the  book  of 
Proverbs ;  she  is  thought  to  direct  the  man  who  trusts 
in  her  and  listens  to  her,  that  she  may  lead  him  to  life, 
happiness,  the  best  blessings. ^ 

The  praise  of  wisdom  is  the  favorite  theme  of  the 
book  of  Wisdom,  in  which  it  is  constantly  personified. ^ 
Chapter  vii.  is  especially  remarkable  in  this  respect, 
because  wisdom  there,  more  clearly  than  anywhere 
else,  appears  as  a  hypostasis,  as  the  universal  artist  en- 
dowed with  the  spirit  and  the  most  varied  divine  per- 
fections.* She  is  an  emanation  from  the  glory  of  the 
Almighty,  the  splendor  of  eternal  light,  a  stainless 
mirror  of  his  activity,  the  image  of  his  goodness.^  She 
is  one,  and  she  can  do  all  things ;  she  remains  the  same, 
and  she  renews  all  things.^  She  stands  in  the  closest 
relation  to  God,  who  loves  her.''  She  sits  at  his  side 
on  the  throne,^  she  is  acquainted  with  all  the  works  of 
God;  for  she  was  present  when  God  created  the  world, 
and  as  supreme  artist  assisted  in  the  creation  of  all 
things,^  also  in  that  of  man.^^  She  knows  the  past,  and 
she  foresees  the  future. ^^     Her  power  extends  from  one 

1  xxiv. 

2  iv.  11  ff.  ;  vi.  18  ff.  ;  xi.  1  ;  xiv.  20  ff.  ;  xv.  2  ff.  ;  li.  13  ff.  ;  comp. 
Prov.  i.  20  ff.  ;  viii.  1  ff.  ;  ix.  1  ff. 

3  i.  6  ;  vi.  12  ff.  ;  viii.  1  ff.,  8  ff.,  16  ff.  ;  ix.  4,  9  ff.  ;  x.  ;  xi.  1. 

*  vv.  21-24.  5  y^.  25  f.  6  yy.  27,  23.  -  viii.  3.  «  ix.  4. 

9  ix.  9,  11  ;  viii.  5  f.  ;  vii.  21,  12.  1°  ix.  2.  "  viii.  8. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  28.    ANGELOLOGY.  263 

end  of  the  world  to  the  other,  and  she  governs  wonder- 
fully all  things.  1  She  is  active  in  the  moral  w^orld  as 
well  as  the  universe  in  general.  From  generation  to 
generation  she  enters  into  holy  souls,  she  makes  them 
friends  of  God  and  prophets,  she  teaches  them  to  recog- 
nize and  fulfil  the  divine  will,  and  she  also  procures 
them  salvation. 2  She  providentially  controlled  the  his- 
tory of  the  first  men,  and  that  of  the  people  Israel.^ 
It  is  God  who  sends  her  from  his  glorious  seat.*  In- 
asmuch as  she  performs  her  work  in  the  physical  and 
the  moral  world  she  is  identified  with  the  spirit  of  God^ 
and  the  word  of  God,^  both  of  whom  here  also  appear 
as  genuine  hypostases. 

We  see  that  though  the  Israelites  under  the  influence 
of  prophetism  did  not  engage  in  speculations  that  could 
serve  as  a  starting  point  for  the  dogma  of  the  trinity,  it 
is  possible  to  show  that  speculations  of  this  kind  flour- 
ished among  the  Jews  in  proportion  as  they  felt  the 
influence  of  Greek  philosophy.  Here  then  is  where 
this  famous  dogma  has  its  roots,  and  not  in  prophetic 
revelation. 

§  28.    ANGELOLOGY. 

The  same  reason  that  led  the  Jews  to  make  the  word 
and  the  wisdom  of  God  genuine  hypostases,  intermedi- 
ate beings,  through  whom  the  transcendent  God  com- 
municates with  men  and  acts  upon  the  w^orld,  contrib- 
uted also  to  the  development  of  angelology.     This  was, 

1  vii.  12  ;  viii.  1.  2  yn.  9,7,  23  ;  ix.  1-19.  ^  Chaps,  x.  -xii. 

*  ix.  10.  5  i.  4  ff.  ;  ix.  17  ;  xii.  1. 

6  ix.  1  f .  ;  xvi.  12,  26  ;  xviii.  15  ff. 


254  THEOLOGY   OF   THE    OLD   TESTAMENT. 

however,  only  a  popular  belief  without  further  impor- 
tance. Before  the  Exile,  in  fact,  there  is  seldom  men- 
tion of  angels  among  the  prophets,  the  best  accredited 
representatives  of  the  religion  of  Israel.  From  the 
Exile  onward,  on  the  contrary,  there  arises  a  genuine 
angelology,  which  takes  an  important  place  in  the 
Jewish  religion,  and  appears  even  in  some  of  the  last 
prophets. 

In  these  latter  the  angels  play  the  entirely  new  part 
of  mediators  and  interpreters  of  prophecy.  They  ap- 
pear in  this  part  in  Ezekiel,^  oftener  still  in  Zecha- 
riah,2  and  especially  in  Daniel.^  They  play  the  same 
part  in  1  Kings  xiii.  18  and  1  Chron.  xxi.  18.  For- 
merly, on  the  contrary,  God  communicated  his  revela- 
tions directly  to  the  prophets. 

In  the  documents  of  Hebraism  the  angels  appear  as 
simple  agents  of  the  Deity,  temporarily  commissioned 
to  make  known  or  execute  the  will  of  God.  They  do 
not  bear  proper  names  to  distinguish  them  from  one 
another;  they  are  not  organized  into  a  hierarchy;  they 
all  appear  to  be  equal  in  dignity,  and  to  derive  their 
authority  only  from  God.  A  single  text,  Josh.  v. 
13-15,  designates  an  angel  as  the  leader  of  the  army  of 
Jehovah.  But  it  is  impossible  to  infer  from  this  pas- 
sage any  precise  idea  respecting  a  hierarchical  organiza- 
tion of  the  angels.  After  the  Exile  it  is  different. 
Then  the  angels  are  organized  as  a  hierarchy;  they 
have  leaders  designated  by  proper  names;  they  are 
classified   into  various    divisions,  each   of    which   has 

1  ix.  2  ff.  ;  xl.  3  ff. ;  xliii.  5  ff. 

2  i.  8  ff.  ;  ii.  1  ff.  ;  iii.  1  ff.  ;  iv.  1  ff.  ;  v.  5  ff.  ;  vi.  4  ff. 

3  iv.  13,  23  ;  vii.  16  ;  viii.  13,  15  ff.  ;  ix.  21  ff.  ;  x.  5  ff.,  15  ff. ;  xii.  5  ff. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  28.   ANGELOLOGY.  255 

special  functions  to  fulfil,  a  particular  department  to 
govern. 

In  Ezekiel  reference  is  made  to  seven  angels  who 
appear  as  the  principal  executors  of  the  judgments  of 
God.i  These  seven  angels  are  perhaps  the  seven  eyes 
of  God  of  which  Zechariah  speaks, ^  and  probably  the 
leaders  or  princes  of  whom  Daniel  speaks.^  The  book 
of  Tobit  also  speaks  of  seven  principal  angels  who  have 
peculiarly  free  access  to  the  presence  of  God,  and  who 
present  to  him  the  prayers  of  the  saints,*  like  the  ser- 
vants and  the  seven  leaders  who  immediately  surround 
the  king  of  Persia.^  It  at  the  same  time  mentions  the 
name  of  one  of  these  celestial  primates  or  archangels, 
Raphael,^  who  serves  as  guide  to  young  Tobias,  accom- 
panies him  to  foreign  parts,  and  brings  him  back  to 
his  home.  The  book  of  Daniel  makes  us  acquainted 
with  the  names  of  two  other  archangels,  viz.:  Gabriel'^ 
and  Michael.^  Other  Jewish  writings  contain  several 
others.^ 

The  development  of  angelology  that  we  have  just 
noticed  appears  also  in  the  fact  that  the  Jews  attributed 
to  the  angels  the  government  and  protection  of  the 
various  peoples  of  the  earth.  In  the  book  of  Daniel, 
for  example,  the  angel  Michael  is  represented  as  the 
leader  and  protector  of  Israel,  and  at  the  same  time  ref- 
erence is  made  to  a  leader  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia  and 
a  leader  of  Javan.^^ 

1  Ezek.  ix.      2  ly.  10  ;  iii.  9.      ^  x.  13.       *  xii.  15  ;  comp.  Rev.  viii.  2. 
5  Esther  i.  10,  14.  e  Tob.  iii.  16 ;  ix.  5  ;  xii.  15. 

7  viii.  16  ;  ix.  21  ;  comp.  Luke  i.  19,  26. 

8  X.  13,  21 ;  xii.  1 ;  comp.  Judith  ix.  ;  Rev.  xii.  7. 

9  Nicolas,  pp.  221  f.  ;  Stapfer,  pp.  53  ff.  ;  [Toy,  pp.  149  ff.]. 
10  X.  13,  20  f.  ;  xii.  1. 


256  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAIMENT. 

The  version  of  the  Seventy  even  makes  Deut.  xxxii. 
8  say  that,  on  the  dispersion  of  the  sons  of  iVdam,  God 
fixed  the  bounds  of  the  peoples  according  to  the  number 
of  the  angels  of  God.  This  is  giving  to  each  people 
an  angel  as  a  guardian,  an  idea  expressed  also  by 
Sirach.^  These  celestial  protectors  ^  waged  war  with 
one  another,  each  defending  the  people  that  had  been 
especially  confided  to  him.^  They  constantly  watched 
over  their  charges.* 

We  remark,  finally,  that  angels  surround  the  throne 
of  God  to  execute,  under  his  supervision,  judgment 
ujDon  the  world.  ^ 

It  follows  from  the  above  that  angelology  was  well 
developed  in  Judaism.  The  Persian  religion  doubt- 
less had  some  influence  upon  it.^  But  there  must  also 
have  been  an  internal  process  analogous  to  that  which, 
in  the  Catholic  church,  has  more  and  more  magnified 
the  saints  and  their  functions. 


§  29.    DEMONOLOGY. 

Angelology  had  its  roots  in  Hebraism  although  it 
did  not  reach  its  doctrinal  development  until  later;  de- 
monology,  on  the  contrary,  had  its  origin  in  Judaism. 
We  have  seen  that,  in  the  eyes  of  the  Hebrews,  God 
could  do  evil  as  well  as  good,  and  he  did  the  one  or  the 
other  according  to  circumstances,  by  his  spirit  or  through 
other  agents,  especially  his  malakh. 

The  first  passage  in  which  there  is  a  reference  to  an 

1  xvii.  17.  2  2  Mace.  xi.  10.  3  Dan.  x.  13,  20. 

4  Dan.  iv.  13,  17,  23.  °  Dan.  vii.  9  f.  ;  comp.  Zech.  iii.  1,  3. 

6  Nicolas,  pp.  48  ff.,  227  ff. 


THIRD    PEKIOD. — §29.    DEMONOLOGY.  257 

evil  spirit  is  1  Kings  xxii.  19-23.  Jehovah  is  seated 
on  his  throne,  and  surrounded  by  the  whole  heavenly 
host.  He  says  to  those  about  him :  "  Who  will  mislead 
Ahab?"  One  replies  in  one  waj-,  another  in  another. 
Then  the  spirit  approaches,  stands  before  Jehovah,  and 
declares  that  he  will  go  forth  to  mislead  Ahab,  becom- 
ing a  lying  spirit  in  the  mouths  of  all  his  prophets. 
This  is  done,  and  the  prophet  Micaiah  says  to  Ahab: 
"Jehovah  hath  sent  a  lying  spirit  into  the  mouths  of 
all  thy  prophets."  There  is,  as  will  be  observed,  a  dif- 
ference between  this  account  and  the  one  that  we  cited 
in  the  preceding  period  concerning  the  spirit  of  God. 
The  spirit  that  is  here  referred  to  does  not  seem  to  be 
a  simple  power  or  emanation  from  Jehovah.  He  belongs 
to  a  council  of  personal  beings ;  he  seems  himself  to  be  a 
personal-  spirit.  He  is  called  haruach^  the  spirit,  though 
most  of  the  translators  omit  the  article.  However,  we 
do  not  by  an}^  means  find  here  the  notion  of  Satan. 
The  lying  spirit  belongs  to  the  host  of  the  heavens;  he 
is  one  of  the  servants  of  God.  Micaiah  says  also  that 
it  is  Jehovah  who  has  sent  a  lying  spirit  into  the 
mouths  of  all  the  prophets  of  Ahab.  This  spirit  is  in 
reality  the  spirit  of  prophecy.  Hence  especially  the 
article.  God,  who  ordinarily  sent  it  to  the  prophets 
to  communicate  to  them  the  truth,  now  sends  it  to 
declare  a  lie,  because  this  enters  into  his  providential 
purposes.  We  still  have  here,  therefore,  to  some  extent 
an  expression  of  the  old  Israelitish  view. 

If  we  pass  to  the  book  of  Job  we  find  in  it,  with 
respect  to  the  question  under  discussion,  as  it  were, 
a  transitional  stage  between  Hebraism  and  Judaism,  i.e. 
the  beginning  of  demonology.     In  the  first  two  chapters 


258  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.    ' 

Jehovah  appears  surrounded  by  the  sons  of  God,  in  the 
midst  of  whom  is  Satan.  He,  with  the  consent  of  God, 
puts  Job  to  the  proof,  sending  upon  him  the  various 
misfortunes  ^  with  which  the  reader  is  familiar.  The 
real  signification  of  the  word  satan  is  clearly  seen  in  a 
number  of  passages  in  which  it  means  adversary.'^  Satan 
appears  also  as  the  adversary  of  Job. 

It  is  interesting  to  compare  with  the  Satan  of  the 
book  of  Job  what  we  read  Num.  xxii.  22  and  32. 
Here  we  see  the  angel  of  Jehovah,  who  is  oftenest  a 
protecting  malakh^  playing  the  part  of  a  satan,  an 
adversary.  The  term  satan  is  used  without  an  article 
as  a  common  noun.  In  the  book  of  Job,  on  the  con- 
trary, we  find  ourselves  confronted  by  a  person  whose 
proper  name  is  Satan,  lias-satan^  with  the  article.  As 
will  be  observed  there  is  an  analogy  between  this  being 
and  the  spirit  of  whom  we  spoke  above. 

Are  we  here  already  confronted  by  a  veritable  Satan  ? 
Many  theologians  say  no.  "It  is  generally  admitted," 
says  M.  Nicolas,  "that  this  being  has  none  of  the 
characteristics  that  befit  a  spirit  evil  by  nature.  In 
the  prologue  to  this  book  Satan  fulfils  the  functions 
of  a  public  prosecutor,  nothing  more.  He  smites  Job 
only  by  express  permission  of  God,  and  even  then  he 
only  causes  the  angels  of  evil  who  execute  the  decrees 
of  God  to  fulfil  their  office.  He  is,  it  is  true,  pictured 
as  having  little  confidence  in  human  virtue.  But  he 
does  not,  of  his  own  motion,  seek  to  lay  snares  for  it, 
and  prepare  for  it  some  signal  overthrow.     He  is  there- 

1  i.  6  ff. ;  ii.  1  ff. 

2  Num.  xxii.  22,  32  ;  1  Sam.  xxix.  4  ;  2  Sam.  xix.  22  ;  1  Kings  v. 
18  ;  xi.  14,  23,  25  ;  Ps.  cix.  6. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  29.    DEMONOLOGY.  259 

fore  not  the  father  of  evil,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the 
expression.  "1  Haag  expresses  himself  to  the  same 
effect. 2  It  is  certain  that  the  Satan  of  the  book  of  Job 
is  not  that  of  traditional  theology.  He  lacks  one 
of  the  chief  characteristics  of  the  latter,  he  is  not  the 
adversary  of  God ;  on  the  contrary,  he  is  of  the  number 
of  his  servants.  He  seems,  however,  to  be  a  little 
nearer  Satan  than  Nicolas  and  Haag  would  make  him. 
He  does  not  resemble  a  simple  public  prosecutor  to  the 
extent  of  being  "personally  indifferent  to  the  result," 
as  the  latter  of  these  scholars  expresses  it.  Is  he  not 
happy  to  find  Job  wanting,  to  show  that  his  piety  is 
purely  selfish  ?  Does  he  not  begrudge  him  his  happi- 
ness? Does  he  not,  with  unalloyed  malignity,  profit 
by  the  permission  to  try  him? 

In  Zech.  iii.  1,  Satan  appears  as  accuser  before  God's 
tribunal.  But  he  finds  himself  sharply  rebuked  by  the 
supreme  judge.  In  this  case  he  plays,  in  a  sense, 
the  part  of  adversary  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  since  he 
attacks  the  high-priest,  the  most  exalted  representative 
of  the  chosen  people.  Joshua,  in  fact,  is  not.  accused 
on  account  of  his  own  sins ;  he  figures  in  this  vision  as 
high-priest;  it  is  his  sacerdotal  garment  that  is  soiled, 
and  Satan  claims  that  there  is  no  expiation  for  the 
people,  loaded  with  sins,  and  that  consequently  Israel 
should  be  rejected.^  It  is,  therefore,  the  opposition 
of  God  to  Satan  and  reciprocally  of  Satan  to  God,  that 
appears  in  this  passage. 

The  last  canonical  passage  that  speaks  of  Satan  is  1 
Chron.  xxi.  1.  Satan  is  there  said  to  arise  against  Israel, 
and  incite  David  to  make  a  census  of  the  people,  i.e.  to 

1  p.  243 ;  [Toy,  p.  165].  2  p.  416.  a  Oehler,  §  200. 


260  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

act  contrary  to  the  will  of  God,  and  thus  bring  upon 
Israel  divine  penalties.  Satan,  therefore,  here  appears 
as  the  adversary  of  the  people  of  God  and  of  God  him- 
self. This  passage,  compared  with  the  parallel  pas- 
sage, 2  Sam.  xxiv.  1,  shows  us  the  difference  between 
the  Hebrew  and  the  Jewish  point  of  view  relative  to 
the  question  under  discussion.  In  the  older  account  it 
is  God  who  moves  David  to  make  the  census ;  God  is 
therefore  still  regarded  as  the  sole  and  supreme  author 
of  all  that  happens,  of  evil  as  well  as  good.  In  the 
passage  from  Chronicles  we  find  an  entirely  different 
conception,  the  fear  of  bringing  reproach  upon  the 
majesty  of  God  by  placing  him  in  immediate  contact 
with  the  world,  and  especially  by  attributing  evil  to 
him;  this  fear  makes  it  necessary  to  have  recourse  to; 
the  influence  of  evil  spirits  to  explain  the  existence  of  1 
evil. 

The  Satan  of  the  Old  Testament  is  then  not  yet  the 
prince  of  this  world.  We  find  there,  however,  the 
starting  point  of  the  demonology  of  later  times.  We 
have  yet,  it  is  true,  to  consider  some  canonical  passages 

jthat  have  often  been  cited  in  support  of  this  doctrine. 

-  Traditional  theology  has  tried  to  find  the  devil  in 
the  serpent  of  the  account  of  the  Fall.  This  is  an  error. 
This  serpent  is  a  genuine  beast  of  the  field,  created  by 
God.  ^  He  is,  it  is  true,  a  marvellous  animal,  but  he 
is  not  more  wonderful  than  the  trees  that,  like  him,  are 
found  in  the  garden  of  Eden.  On  a  soil  that  produces 
such  trees,  the  existence  of  an  animal  of  this  sort  is 
nothing  that  should  astonish  us.  In  other  religions  of 
antiquity  the  serpent,  moreover,  plays  an  analogous 
1  Gen.  iii.  1,  14. 


THIRD   PERIOD. §  29.    DEMONOLOGY.  261 

part.^  We.  entirely  agree  with  Baudissin  who  says  on 
this  subject :  "  The  serpent  does  not  here  appear  as  the 
incarnation  of  any  supernatural  power.  The  idea  that 
it  is  Satan  who  speaks  for  it  has  been  read  into  the 
account  by  later  interpretation,  it  has  not  been  drawn 
from  it.  Though  the  serpent  speaks  it  does  not,  in  so 
doing,  leave  the  bounds  of  the  animal  kingdom,  any 
more  than  Balaam's  ass  when  it  speaks;  for  the  whole 
narrative  bears  a  mythical  character.  Neither  is  wick- 
edness attributed  to  it;  but  to  explain  sin,  which 
cannot  have  its  origin  in  man,  created  good  by  God, 
the  cause  of  it  must  be  ascribed  to  some  other  being. 
None  appeared  fitter  for  it  than  the  serpent,  Vhich 
inspires  aversion  in  man,  and  which  the  Semites  re- 
garded as  more  cunning  than  the  other  animals.  "^ 

The  attempt  ha«  also  been  made  to  find  the  devil  in 
the  shedhim,^  and  the  seirim^  as  well  as  in  azazel.^ 
The  exact  signification  of  these  terms,  which  are  found 
only  in  the  passages  cited,  is  not  easy  to  determine. 
However,  competent  modern  exegetes  no  longer  admit 
that  they  denote  the  devil,  but  simply  species  of  phan- 
toms, sprites,  or  evil  sjDirits,  that  existed  only  in  popu- 
lar belief.^  Since  there  is  reference  to  them  only  in 
some  few  passages,  almost  all  of  recent  date,  it  would 
not  be  proper  to  see  in  them  integral  elements  of  the 
religion  of  Israel.  In  several  passages  the  sacred 
authors  treat  even  these  imaginary  beings  as  vain  idols, 
while  the  unfaithful  Israelites  offer  them  sacrifices.''' 

1  Baudissin,  I.  pp.  255  ff.       2 1.  p,  290.      '^  Deut.  xxxii.  17;  Ps.  cvi.  37. 

*  Lev.  xvii.  7  ;  Isa.  xiii.  21 ;  xxxiv.  14  ;  2  Chron.  xi.  15. 

5  Lev.  xvi.  8,  10  f .,  26. 

6  See  Knobel  on  Lev.  xvi.  10  ;  xvii.  7  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  17 ;  Isa.  xiii.  21. 
"'  Deut.  xxxii.  17  ;  Ps.  cvi.  37  ;  Lev.  xvii.  7  ;  2  Cliron.  xi.  15. 


262  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

When  we  pass  to  the  apocryphal  books  we  find, 
Wis.  ii.  23  f.,  the  idea  that  God  had  created  man  for 
immortality,  that  he  had  made  him  in  his  own  image, 
but  that  the  devil,  out  of  envy,  introduced  death  into 
the  world.  This  is  the  first  time  that  the  tempting 
serpent  of  the  account  of  the  Fall  is  identified  with  the 
devil.  In  the  book  of  Baruch,  idols  and  demons  are 
identified.^  The  version  of  the  Seventy,  in  a  number 
of  passages,  renders  the  words  denoting  idols  or  spec- 
tres, demons.^  The  demons  are  thought  to  prefer  the 
desert  for  their  dwelling-place.^  They  are  called  evil 
spirits.^ 

The  book  of  To'bit  gives  us  the  proper  -name  of  a 
demon  that  plays  an  important .  part  in  the  narrative ; 
he  is  called  Asmodeus.  He  is  enamored  of  Sara, 
daughter  of  Raguel,  and  slays  one  after  another  her 
seven^ former  husbands.^  But  the  son  of  Tobit,  by 
the  ad?ice  of  the  angel  Raphael,  puts  him  to  flight,  by 
burning,  the  day  before  his  marriage  with  Sara,  the 
heart  and  the  liver  of  a  fish,  the  smell  of  which  the 
demon  cannot  endure.^  In  Upper  Egypt,  whither  As- 
modeus escapes,  he  is  strangled  by  Raphael.'^ 

We  see  that  demonology  was  considerably  devel- 
oped in  the  midst  of  Judaism,  and  the  ground  p^pared 
for  the  more  complete  demonology  of  later  ages.  Dual- 
ism, so  thoroughly  antagonistic  to  the  ancient  religion 
of  Israel,  after  the  Jews,  from  the  Exile  onward,  be- 

1  iv.  7.  V 

2  Deut.  xxxii.  17  ;  Isa.  xiii.  21  (Sept.  23)  ;  xxxiv.  14  ;  Ixv.  11 ;  Ps. 
xcvi,  5  ;  cv.  37  (Sept.  xcv.  5,  and  cv.  37) . 

3  Bar.  iv.  35  ;  Tob.  viii.  3.  *  Tob.  vi.  8.  ^  m  g  ;  vi.  14. 
6  vi.  8,  15-17  ;  viii.  2  f.                  7  yiji.  3. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  30.   DEATH   AND  FUTURE  LIFE.      263 

came  acquainted  with  it  through  the  Persian  religion, 
seems  to  have  powerfully  assisted  the  development  of 
Jewish  demonologt. 

§  30.    DEATH  AND  THE  PUTURE  LIFE. 

Of  all  the  questions  relating  to  man  the  only  one 
that  we  have  to  treat  here  is  that  concerning  death  and 
the  future  life. 

Respecting  death  there  exists  a  twofold  view  in  the 
Old  Testament.  On  the  one  hand  it  is  regarded  as 
something  natural;  on  the  other,  it  appears  as  the  con- 
sequence and  the  penalty  of  sin.  This  can  be  shown 
even  from  the  first  narratives  of  document  A . 

In  fact  we  see  God  threaten  Adam  with  death  in  case 
he  shall  transgress  his  will,^  and  after  the  transgres- 
sion execute  his  threat. ^  But  in  the  same  fragment,^ 
we  read  that  man  was  taken  from  the  dust^ef  the  earth, 
and  that  he  will  return  to  it.^  Though  he  represents 
death  as  at  once  a  penalty  and  a  natural  consequence  of 
the  terrestrial  origin  of  man,  our  author  reconciles  this 
twofold  view  by  showing  that  man  would  have  been  able 
to  rise  to  a  higher  and  eternal  life  by  the  special  grace 
of  God,  and  obedience  to  his  will.  Man  had  the  right 
to  eat  of  the  tree  of  life,  the  tree  that  communicates 
eternal  life,  and  he  lost  this  right  only  in  consequence 
of  his  disobedience.*  Though  man  was  mortal  by  nature 
he  could  have  attained  to  immortality  by  his  faithful- 
ness to  God.     In  the  old  fragment.  Gen.  vi.  1-4,  man 

1  Gen.  ii.  17  ;  iii.  3.  2  Gen.  iii.  19,  22-24. 

3  Gen.  ii.  7  ;  iii.  19  ;  comp.  Ps.  xc.  3  j  cxlvi.  4. 
*  Gen.  ii.  9,  16 ;  iii.  22  ff. 


26^      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

is  called  flesh,  ^  like  the  animals,  which  seems  to  imply 
the  idea  that  he  is  mortal  by  virtue  of  his  physical  con- 
stitution. But  the  same  fragment  says  that  God  re- 
duced to  a  hundred  and  twenty  years  the  duration  of 
human  life,  which  had  formerly  been  much  longer,  and 
that  he  did  this  to  punish  human  perversity.  Accord- 
ing to  the  account  of  the  Fall,  man  dies  because  he  can 
no  longer  eat  of  the  fruit  of  the  tree  of  life.  Accord- 
ing to  the  passage  just  cited,  on  the  contrary,  his  days 
are  reduced  because  the  spirit  of  God,  the  vital  princi- 
ple of  every  thing  that  exists,  will  not  always  remain 
in  man. 

The  translation  of  Enoch  and  Elijah  ^  seems  also  to 
indicate  that  man  was  not  necessarily  subject  to  death, 
that  death  was  not  inseparable  from  human  nature. 
The  same  thought  recurs  in  the  prophetic  declaration 
that  foretells  the  abolition  of  death  under  the  reign  of 
the  Messiah.^  We  see,  finally,  that  dead  bodies,  and 
all  that  came  into  contact  with  them,  were  regarded  as 
unclean  and  defiled,*  as  things  for  which  God  feels 
repulsion,  and  which  he  cannot  have  desired.  It  also 
follows  from  a  multitude  of  other  passages  too  numer- 
ous to  be  cited  here  that  death,  while  appearing  natural, 
is  3^et,  according  to  the  Old  Testament  as  a  whole,  the 
result  and  the  principal  penalty  of  sin. 

What  did  the  Israelites  think  of  the  condition  of  man 
after  death?  Though  the  contrary  has*  often  been 
asserted,  it  is  certain  that,  from  remote  antiquity,  the 
Hebrews  believed  in  the  survival  of  the  dead,  in  a 
future  life.     This  is  proven  by  the  practice  of  invok- 

1  V.  3.         2  Gen.  v.  24  ;  2  Kings  ii.        ^  isa.  xxv.  8  ;  comp.  xxvi.  19. 
4  Num.  V.  2 ;  xix.  11  ff.:  Hag.  ii.  13. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  30.  DEATH   AND  FUTURE  LIFE.      265 

ing  the  dead,  which  was  so  deeply  rooted,  that  in  spite 
of  repeated  and  severe  prohibitions,  it  was  long  main- 
tained in  Israel.^  Though  it  was  forbidden,  this  was 
not  because  there  was  doubt  about  the  survival  of  the 
dead ;  but  the  invocation  of  the  dead  was  regarded  as  a 
superstition,  and  a  token  of  unfaithfulness  to  Jehovah, 
who  alone  was  to  be  consulted.  It  is  said  that  the  dead 
"have  been  gathered  with  the  fathers,"  with  the  ances- 
tors, not  only  in  the  rec£jit  passages  of  document  C,^ 
but  also  in  those  of  an  earlier  date.^  This  formula  is 
employed  even  when  the  dead  have  not  been  buried 
with  the  fathers.  Thus  Jacob  says  that  he  shall  go 
down  with  sorrow  to  his  son  Joseph,  to  the  abode  of 
the  dead,^  though  he  believed  that  this  son  had  been 
devoured  by  a  wild  beast.  Is  it  not  also  faith  in  a 
sojourn  of  the  dead  where  the  departed  are  found  again, 
that  dictated  the  words  of  David  on  the  death  of  a  dear 
child:  "I  shall  go  to  him;  but  he  will  not  return  to 
me  ?  "  ^  Without  faith  in  a  future  existence  the  transla-  ; 
tion  of  Enoch  and  Elijah  would  be  difficult  to  explain. 
And  then  the  various  resurrections  mentioned  in  the  ; 
Old  Testament:^  are  they  not  incompatible  with  the 
idea  that  death  is  a  complete  destruction  of  a  human 
being  ?  Though  some  passages  speak  of  death  as  de- 
struction,^ it  is  so  called   because  it   is  the    destruc- 

1  1  Sam.  xxviii.  3,  7  ff.  ;  Isa.  viii.  19  ;  xix.  3  ;  xxix.  4 ;  Deut.  xviii. 
11  ;  Lev.  xix.  31 ;  xx.  6,  27  ;  2  Kings  xxi,  6  ;  xxiii.  24. 

2  Gen.  XXV.  8,  17  ;  xxxv.  29  ;  xlix.  29,  33  ;  Num.  xx.  24,  26  ;  xxvii. 
13  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  50. 

3  Gen.  XV.  15  ;  Jud.  ii.  10  ;  2  Sam.  vii.  12 ;  1  Kings  i.  21 ;  ii.  10 ; 
xi.  21.  4  Gen.  xxxvii.  35.  &  2  Sam.xii.  23. 

«  1  Kings  xvii.  21  ff.  ;  2  Kings  iv.  34  ff.  ;  xiii.  21. 

"  Job  vii.  8,  21  ;  xiv.  10  ;  Isa.  xxxviii.  18  ;  xxvi.  14 ;  Ps.  xxxvii,  36  ; 
S2;2£U.  13. 


266      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

tion,  the  end  of  the  present  life,^  or  because  the  future 
life  appears  unreal  as  compared  with  the  present.  Ec- 
clesiastes  without  doubt  places  man  on  the  same  level 
as  the  beast,  and  finds  that  their  lot  is  the  same.^  But 
in  this  entire  book  appears  a  skepticism  and  a  pessimism 
that  is  not  found  in  any  other  book  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. It  is  therefore  unfair  to  regard  the  view  that  it 
expresses  as  that  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

The  abode  of  the  dead  is  called  sheol^  a  word  whose 
etymology  is  not  perfectly  certain.  It  is  found  even 
in  document  A.^  When  we  examine  more  closely 
what  the  Old  Testament  says  about  the  abode  of  the 
dead  we  find  that  the  Israelites  had  no  very  definite 
ideas  on  the  subject,  that  they  hardly  thought  of  the 
departed  except  to  represent  their  condition  as  a  lam- 
entable one.  They  pictured  to  themselves  slieol  as  an 
abyss,  where  man  will  perish,  in  a  sense,  after  death; 
for  the  word  ahJiaddon^  a  synonym  of  sheol  and  of  death 
in  several  passages,^  means  at  the  same  time  abyss  and 
destruction.  This  abyss  is  in  the  depths  of  the  earth. ^ 
It  is  an  insatiable  gulf,^  whence  nothing  can  return.'^ 
It  is  a  dark^  and  silent^  place.     It  is  the  region  of 

1  Job  vii.  8-10.  2  iii.  i8_21. 

3  Gen.  xxxvii.  35  ;  xlii.  38  ;  xliv.  29. 

*  Job  xxvi.  6  ;  xxviii.  22;  Prov.  xv.  11  ;  xxvii.  20. 

s  Num.  xvi.  30-33  ;  Job  xxvi.  5  ;  Ps.  xxx.  3  ;  Iv.  15  ;  Ixiii.  10  ; 
Prov.  vii.  27  ;  ix.  18  ;  xv.  24 ;  Isa.  xiv.  9,  15  ;  Ezek.  xxvi.  20 ;  xxxi. 
141,  18;  xxxii.  18,  21,  24. 

6  Isa.  V.  14  ;  Hab.  ii.  5  ;  Prov.  i.  12  ;  xxvii.  20  ;  xxx.  16. 

7  Job  vii.  9  ;  xvi.  22  ;  xvii.  13-15. 

8  Job  X.  22  ;  xvii.  13  ;  xviii.  18  ;  Jer.  xiii.  16 ;  Ps.  xlix.  19  ;  Ixxxviii. 
6,  12  ;  cxliii.  3  ;  Lam.  iii.  6. 

9  Isa.  xxxviii.  18;  Ps.  xxx.  9;  xxxi.  17;  Ixxxviii.  10;  xciv.  17; 
cxv.  17. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  30.  DEATH  AND  FUTURE  LIFE.      267 

forgetf Illness,^  where  nothing  is  seen,  or  done  more,^ 
where  there  is  no  longer  even  any  relation  with  God,^ 
though  self-consciousness,  personality,  is  not  lost.^ 
Rich  and  poor,  good  and  bad,  great  and  small,  all  men 
there  mingle  with  one  another.^  There  is,  in  fact,  no 
retribution  after  this  life.^  The  earth  is  called  "land 
of  the  living,"  in  contrast  with  Sheol."  Existence  in 
Sheol  more  nearl}^  resembles  death  than  life,  it  is  only 
an  apparent  life;  for  the  departed  are  rephaim,  i.e. 
shades;^  it  is  in  a  sense  a  state  of  perpetual  sleep. ^ 

It  is  easy,  in  view  of  the  above  statements,  to  believe 
that  the  prospect  of  the  future  life  had  no  attraction  for 
the  Israelites,  that  it  could  only  fill  them  with  pro- 
found sadness.  Death  appeared  to  them  without  hope ;  ^^ 
it  was  like  the  king  of  terrors ;  ^^  it  was  desirable  only 
in  extreme  misfortune,  and  to  put  an  end  to  it.^^  It 
also  follows  from  the  above  that  faith  in  a  future  life 
was  without  any  value,  and  without  any  religious  or 
moral  influence,  becaues  it  did  not  involve  the  idea  of 

r 

1  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  12. 

2  Job  iii.  13,  17  ;  xiv.  21 ;  xvii.  16  ;  Eccl.  ix.  5  f.,  10  ;  Ps.  vi.  5. 

3  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  5  ;  Isa.  xxxviii.  18. 

^  1  Sam.  xxviii.  15  ff. ;  Ezek.  xxxii.  21  ;  Job  xiv.  22  ;  xxvi.  5  ; 
xxviii.  22.  &  Ezek.  iii.  13-19  ;  Ps.  xlix.  10-14. 

6  Eccl.  ix.  5. 

■^  Job  xxviii.  13  ;  Ps.  xxvii.  13  ;  Iii.  5  ;  cxvi.  9  ;  cxlii.  5 ;  Isa.  xxxviii. 
11  ;  liii.  8  ;  Jer.  xi.  19  ;  Ezek.  xxvi.  20 ;  xxxii.  23,  32. 

8  Job  xxvi.  5  ;  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  10  ;  Prov.  ii.  18  ;  ix.  18  ;  xxi.  16  ;  Isa. 
xiv.  9 ;  xxvi.  14,  19. 

9  Job  iii.  13  ;  xiv.  12  ;  Jer.  li.  39,  57. 

w  2  Sam.  xiv.  14  ;  Job  vii.  7  ff. ;  x.  20-22 ;  xiv.  7-22  ;  xvii.  11-16 ; 
Isa.  xxxviii.  1  ff.,  10  ff.;  Ps.  cxvi.  3. 

11  Job  xviii.  14. 

12  Job  iii.  3-5,  21 ;  vi.  8  f. ;  xiv.  13  ;  Isa.  Ivii.  1  f. 


268  THEOLOGY  OF  THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 

a  retribution  beyond  the  tomb.  God  punishes  the 
wicked,  not  after  death,  but  by  death,  by  an  unhappy 
and  premature  death.  ^  God  blesses  the  righteous,  not 
with  everlasting  life,  but  with  a  long  and  happy  earthly 
existence. 2  The  hope  of  having  a  numerous  posterity, 
and  surviving  in  ones'  children  is  a  far  fairer  prospect 
than  that  of  the  future  life.^ 

We  conclude  from  the  above  that  it  is  equally 
wrong  to  maintain  that  the  Israelites  did  not  believe  in 
a  future  life,  or  to  attribute  to  them  the  hope  of  ever- 
lasting life  in  the  Christian  sense,  two  errors  into  which 
men  have  alternately  fallen.  If  faith  in  eternal  life, 
and  consequently  in  a  judgment  with  everlasting  re- 
wards and  penalties,  had  been  disseminated  in  Israel  it 
would  certainly  have  been  introduced  into  the  Penta- 
teuch as  a  sanction  for  the  law,  and  into  the  preaching 
of  the  prophets  as  a  stimulus  to  faithfulness.  But 
everywhere,  even  in  the  most  recent  legislative  and 
prophetical  documents  recourse  is  had  only  to  temporal 
promises  and  threats,  to  incite  to  good,  or  to  deter  from 
evil.  In  Israel,  in  fact,  faith  in  everlasting  life  was 
not  by  any  means  what  it  has  become  through  the  gos- 
pel ;  it  filled  with  terror  and  not  with  hope ;  it  could 
not  therefore  under  the  old  covenant  play  the  part  that 
it  does  under  the  new.  Moreover  it  should  not  be  for- 
gotten that  in  all  the  documents  antedating  the  Exile, 

1  Gen.  vi.  f.;  xviii.  f. ;  xxxviii.  7  ;  Lev.  x.  1  ff.  ;  Num.  xvi.  ;  2  Sam. 
xii.  13  f.  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  30  ;  Ezek.  iii.  18,  20  ;  xviii.  ;  xxxiii.  8  f .,  12  f. ; 
Job  xi.  20  ;  xxiv.  19  ;  etc. 

2  Ex.  XX.  12 ;  Lev.  xviii.  5  ;  Deut.  iv.  1,  40 ;  v.  33  ;  vi.  2,  24 ;  viii. 
1 ;  xi.  8  f .  ;  xxx.  15-20  ;  xxxii.  47  ;  Amos  v.  4,  6,  14  ;  Hab.  ii.  4  ;  Ezek. 
xviii.  9,  17,  19,  21  f.,  27  f.  ;  xx.  11  ;  xxxiii.  14  ff. ;  etc. 

3  Gen.  xii.  2  f .  ;  xv.  2  ff.  ;  xvii.  4  ;  xxvi.  3  f. ;  xxviii.  14. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  30.    DEATH  AND  FUTURE  LIFE.      269 

this  faith  appears  as  a  simple  popular  belief,  and  no- 
where as  an  integral  part  of  the  religion  of  Israel. 

The  attempt  has,  however,  been  made  to  find  a  more 
or  less  evangelical  hope  of  everlasting  life,  if  not  in 
all  the  Israelites,  at  least  in  some  choice  spirits.  But 
if  it  existed  it  must  have  shown  itself  in  the  prophets, 
the  elite  of  the  nation.  Now  we  have  seen  that,  on  the 
contrary,  it  is  wanting  in  the  teaching  of  the  proph- 
ets. Let  us,  however,  examine  the  passages  in  which 
this  statement  is  believed  to  find  support. 

One  of  the  principal  is  Job  xix.  25-27.  But  in  this 
book  there  is  no  lack  of  passages  declaring  that  man,  in 
spite  of  his  righteousness,  retains  no  hope  after  death. ^ 
More  than  this,  the  entire  book  is  incomprehensible 
if  the  author  believed  in  the  everlasting  felicity  of  the  \ 
righteous.  The  problem  that  is  there  discussed  would,  j 
in  fact,  have  found  in  this  faith  a  natural  solution,  and 
would  have  completely  lost  the  tragical  character  Avith 
which  he  has  invested  it.^  What  then  is  the  meaning 
of  the  passage  in  question  ?  It  is  partially  explained  by 
xvi.  19-22,  where  Job,  foreseeing  that  the  number  of 
his  years  approaches  its  end,  expresses  the  hope  that 
God  will  be  his  advocate,  and  vindicate  him  against 
his  accusing  friends.  The  same  idea  is  expressed  xix. 
25-27,  but  in  language  much  more  enthusiastic.  Job 
there  repeats  that  after  his  death  God  will  be  his  aven- 
ger, his  defender,  to  vindicate  him  against  the  unjust 
accusations  that  his  friends  direct  against  him.  He 
"  is  convinced  that  in  spite  of  appearances  God  will  in 

1  vii.  6  f. ;  X.  20  f.  ;  xiv.  ;  xvii.  13  ff. 

2  Comp.  Reuss,  Philosophie,  p.  22  ;  Gesch.,  §  238  ;  Schultz,  II.  pp. 
329  ff. 


270      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

the  end  publicly  recognize  his  innocence,  and  if  he  does 
not  do  so  before  his  death,  he  will  at  least  do  so  after- 
ward. .  .  .  He  sees  beforehand  this  vindication,  his 
heart  leaps  with  agitation  in  view  of  this  prospect."^ 

It  is  also  maintained  that  in  some  passages  of  Prov- 
erbs, everlasting  felicity  is  promised  to  the  righteous. 
The  most  important  of  these  passages  are  xiv.  32  and 
XV.  24.  In  the  former  we  read  that,  "  The  just  findeth 
a  refuge  even  in  his  death,"  and  in  the  latter  that  "for 
the  wise  the  path  of  life  leadeth  upward,  that  he  may 
shun  the  abode  of  the  dead  which  is  below."  Oehler 
does  not  think  it  possible  to  find  here  the  hope  of  ever- 
lasting life,  because  there  is  no  indication  that  the  life, 
which  in  certain  passages  of  Proverbs  is  represented  as 
the  reward  of  wisdom,  is  life  beyond  the  tomb.^  He 
thinks  that,  in  the  first  of  these  passages,  the  author 
speaks  perhaps  either  of  the  confidence  of  the  righteous 
in  extreme  danger,  or  of  the  hope  that  animates  him,  in 
the  face  of  death,  touching  the  future  of  his  posterity 
(such  as  Jacob  expresses.  Gen.  xlix.  18),  or  touching 
his  own  memory  (in  the  sense  of  Prov.  x.  7,  which  says 
that  the  memory  of  the  righteous  is  a  blessing).  He 
holds  that  in  the  second  passage  there  is  reference  only 
to  a  long  and  blissful  earthly  life,  secured  by  divine 
protection.^  It  should,  moreover,  be  observed  that, 
according  to  the  version  of  the  Seventy,  the  former  of 
these  passages  speaks  of  the  confidence  that  the  right- 
eous may  have  in  his  virtue,  not  of  that  which  he  may 
have  at  the  time  of  death.  This  proves  that  the  first 
translators  did  not  find  in  it  the  hope  of  everlasting 
felicity.  On  the  latter  passage,  which  says  of  the  wise 
2  ii.  21  f.  ;  iii.  16  ;  x.  30  ;  etc.  3  §  243. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  30.  DEATH  AND  FUTURE  LIFE.      271 

that  the  path  of  life  leads  upward  in  contrast  with  Sheol 
which  is  below,  Reuss  remarks  that  "  the  ascent  of  the 
first  line  is  suggested  by  the  descent  of  the  second,"  so 
that  "  it  is  not  necessary  to  think  here  of  immortality."  ^ 
Finally  the  attempt  has  been  made  to  find  the  hope 
of  everlasting  felicity  in  some  psalms.  It  would  not 
be  surprising  if  this  were  the  case,  since  these  psalms 
may  date  from  a  time  when  such  a  hope  really  existed 
among  the  Jews.  The  first  of  the  passages  brought 
forward  is  Ps.  xvi.  10  f. :  "  Thou  wilt  not  abandon  my 
soul  to  the  abode  of  the  dead ;  thou  wilt  not  permit  thy 
well-beloved  to  see  the  pit.  Thou  wilt  make  known  to 
me  the  path  of  life ;  there  is  fulness  of  joy  before  thee, 
there  are  delights  at  thy  right  hand  forever."  But, 
frankly,  we,  with  many  exegetes,  see  here  only  the  hope 
of  being  delivered  from  danger  of  death,  and  of  tasting 
the  delights  of  communion  with  God,  which  for  the 
psalmist  is  the  highest  good.^  As  for  the  expression 
"forever,"  it  should  not  be  pressed  to  the  extent  of 
finding  in  it  everlasting  duration,  since  expressions  of 
this  kind  in  the  Old  Testament  often  have  only  a  very 
restricted  and  relative  signification.  Another  passage 
that  should  be  taken  into  account  is  Ps.  xlix.  15,  where 
we  read:  "God  will  save  my  soul  from  the  abode  of 
death,  for  he  will  take  me,"  which  perhaps  means  he 
will  take  me,  like  Enoch,  to  himself.  Many  exe- 
getes, however,  deny  that  in  this  passage  there  is  refer- 
ence to  the  hope  of  everlasting  life.  Reuss,  in  favor 
of  this  opinion,  brings  forward  a  number  of  considera- 
tions that  have  weight.  In  any  case,  the  text,  consid- 
ered in  itself,  might,  like  others  of  the  same  kind, 
1  Reuss,  I  J.  2^.2. 


272  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

mean  that  God  will  save  the  psalmist  from  death. 
But  when  the  context  is  considered,  when  it  becomes 
apparent  that  verse  15  is  contrasted  with  the  verses 
preceding,  which  say  of  those  who  perish  that  they  are 
placed  in  the  abode  of  the  dead,  and  that  death  makes 
them  his  pasture,^  —  this  would  lead  us  to  think  that 
there  is  here  reference  to  a  salvation  beyond  the  tomb. 
It  remains  to  consider  Ps.  Ixxiii.  24-26.  Here  also  in 
contrast  with  the  wicked,  who  are  overthrown,  destroyed, 
annihilated  by  a  sudden  end,^  the  psalmist  hopes  that 
he  will  be  exalted  to  glory,  and  have  God  for  his 
portion  forever,  when  even  his  flesh  and  his  heart  are 
decayed.  In  this,  as  in  the  preceding  passage,  the 
author  aspires  to  be  united  with  God,  to  obtain  glory 
and  felicity  forever;  consequently  he  expresses  some 
hope  of  obtaining  this  favor.  But  none  of  these  pas- 
sages expresses  a  full  and  complete  confidence  in  ever- 
lasting salvation. 

The  first  and  the  only  canonical  passage  in  which  such 
a  hope  is  confidently  asserted  is  Dan.  xii.  2  f.,  where  we 
read :  "  Many  of  those  who  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth 
will  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  others  to  shame, 
to  everlasting  disgrace.  Those  who  have  had  under- 
standing will  shine  like  the  brightness  of  the  heavens, 
and  those  Avho  have  taught  the  multitude  righteousness, 
will  shine  like  the  stars  for  ever  and  ever."  Here  the 
idea  of  everlasting  life  is  expressed  with  all  the  clear- 
ness to  be  desired,  and  with  it  the  idea  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead,  of  a  future  retribution,  of  everlasting 
punishments  for  the  wicked,  and  eternal  felicity  for 
the  righteous.  It  should,  however,  be  noticed  that 
1  vv.  7-14.  2  ^^,.  16  ff. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  30.   DEATH  AND  FUTURE  LIFE.      273 

there  is  no  reference  in  Daniel  to  a  universal  resurrec- 
tion. A  part  only  of  those  who  sleep  will  awake.  It 
is  probable  that  to  the  mind  of  the  author,  the  favor  of 
a  resurrection  is  reserved  for  the  Jews  only.^  Faith  in 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  is  also  expressed  in  the 
second  book  of  Maccabees, ^  where  we  see  that  prayers 
for  the  dead  early  begin  to  be  united  with  this  faith. ^ 

The  question  has  been  much  discussed,  through  what 
foreign  influence  the  Jews  attained  to  the  idea  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead;  but  this  discussion  has  not 
issued  in  perfectly  reliable  results.*  For  biblical  theol- 
ogy it  is  more  interesting  to  show  that  the  germs  of 
this  doctrine  exist  in  some  prophetical  passages,  and 
that  it  may  have  arisen  in  the  midst  of  Judaism  with- 
out foreign  influence.  The  prophets  had  always  fore- 
told the  destruction,  the  death  of  Israel,  as  a  punishment 
for  their  sins.^  But  they  could  not  admit  their  com- 
plete annihilation.  Hence  the  frequently  expressed 
idea  of  a  remnant  that  will  abide  after  the  divine  judg- 
ment and  penalties,  and  form  a  new  people  of  God,  in 
a  new  era.  This  restoration  is  by  several  prophets 
represented  as  a  resurrection  of  the  destroyed  people.^ 
Now  the  idea  of  collective  resurrection  could  easily  lead 
to  that  of  individual  resurrection,  which  seems  to  break 
forth,  Isa.  xxvi.  19. 

The  germs  of  this  doctrine,  which  we  have  just  shown 

1  Hitzig  and  Reuss,  i.l. 

2  vii.  9,  11,  14,  23,  29,  36  ;  xii.  43  ff.;  xiv.  46.  8  xii.  43  ff. 
*  Nicolas,  pp.  325  ff. 

5Hos.  vi.  5;  ix.  6;  xiii.  1;  Isa.  i.  4-9;  Mic.  iii.  12;  Deut.  xxx. 
15  ff. ;  Jer.  iv. ;  Ezek.  xxxiii.  11  ;  Lam.  ii.  17. 

6  Hos.  vi.  1-3  ;  xiii.  14  ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  1-14  ;  Isa.  xxvi.  18  f. ;  Ixv. 
17-19. 


274      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

to  have  existed  in  tlie  teaching  of  the  prophets,  appear 
to  have  been  developed  especially  during  the  sore  perse- 
cutions that  were  directed  against  the  Jews  by  Antio- 
chus  Epiphanes ;  this,  in  fact,  is  the  epoch  at  which  it 
presents  itself  to  us  in  the  book  of  Daniel.  "The 
feverish  expectation  of  the  end,  a  hatred  of  oppression 
that  was  not  satisfied  by  the  prospect  of  a  temporal  and 
fleeting  vengeance,  above  all  the  conviction  that  eter- 
nal righteousness  could  not  allow  the  countless  victims 
who  died  for  their  God  and  their  faith,  to  fall  un- 
rewarded, all  these  causes  finally  gave  rise  to  the  belief 
in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  a  judgment  beyond 
the  tomb."^  This  belief,  then,  appears  as  a  product  of 
messianic  hopes,  and  faith  in  divine  justice.'^ 

Along  with  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  which  arose  and  was  developed  among  the  Pales- 
tinian Jews,  we  see  the  doctrine  of  the  immortality  of 
the  soul  take  shape  among  the  Jews  of  Alexandria. 
It  appears  for  the  first  time  in  one  of  our  apocr3^phal 
books,  viz.  in  Wisdom.  The  author  seems  to  have 
been  forced  to  emphasize  this  thought  by  epicureanism, 
which  denied  the  future  life,  and  had  for  a  device :  Let 
us  eat  and  drink  for  to-morrow  we  shall  die.^  Accord- 
ing to  this  book  souls  pre-exist,*  and  are  confined  in  the 
body  as  in  a  prison ;  ^  God  in  creating  man  in  his  own 
image,  created  him  to  be  imperishable,  immortal,^  as 
he  did  all  other  things ;  ^  he  did  not  make  death,  and  he 
finds  no  pleasure  in  seeing  the  living  perish ;  ^  death 

1  Reuss,  Apocalypse,  p.  8. 

2  Reuss,  Theol.  Chret.,  I.  pp.  76  f. ;  Nicolas,  pp.  355  ff.  ;  Seinecke, 
Gesch.  des  Volkes  Israel,  pp.  144  f. ;  [Montefiore,  Lectures,  p.  456]. 

8  ii.  1-20.        *  viii.  19  f.        &  ix.  15.        e  n  £3.        "^  i.  14.         » i.  13. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  30.  DEATH  AND  FUTURE  LIFE.      275 

entered  the  world  through  the  envy  of  the  devil,  ^  but 
righteousness  is  not  subject  to  death  ;2  observance  of 
the  divine  ordinances  gives  assurance  of  immortality, 
and  immortality  assimilates  to  God;^  the  souls  of  the 
righteous  are  in  the  hands  of  God,  —  fools  only  can 
believe  that  they  die, —  their  hope  is  immortal;  after 
having  passed  through  the  crucible  of  trial,  they  shine, 
they  judge  the  nations,  they  govern  the  peoples ;  *  thus 
the  righteous  will  live  forever.^  The  wicked  seem  to 
be  condemned  to  death,  to  annihilation.^  On  the  other 
hand,  however,  there  are  signs  of  a  belief  that  they 
also  live  forever,  and  that  they  even  know  the  lot  of 
the  righteous.^  For,  "in  the  language  of  our  author, 
the  term  dead  already  has  the  figurative  signification  in 
which  we  find  it  used  in  the  New  Testament,  viz.  that 
of  damnation,  the  absolute  want  of  felicity."^  These 
ideas  are  still  further  developed  by  Philo,  from  whose 
writings  it  clearly  appears  that  they  were  borrowed 
from  Plato.9 

Once  more,  in  conclusion,  we  notice  the  difference 
that  in  the  beginning  existed  between  the  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  that  of  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  since  confounded  in  Christian  dogmatics. 
The  doctrine  of  the  resurrection,  which  is  more  espe- 
cially Jewish  and  theological,  started  from  the  idea  that 
God  is  able  to  restore  the  dead  to  life.^^  The  more  phil- 
osophical doctrine  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  which' 

1  ii.  24.  2  i.  15.  3  yi.  18  f . ;  viii.  17  ;  xv.  3. 

*  iii.1-9.  s  V.  15  f.  6  i.  15  f..  ni,  io_i9  ;  iv.  19  ;  v.  14. 

"^  V.  1-13.  8  Reuss,  PMlosophie,  p.  510. 

9  Nicolas,  pp.  318  ff. ;  comp.  Haag,  pp.  421  f.  ;  von  Colin,  §  108; 
[Knenen,  Beligion  of  Israel,  HI.  pp.  196  ff.]. 
10  See  2  Mace.  yii.  23  ;  comp.  Nicolas,  p.  327. 


\ 


276  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT. 

sprang  from  the  school  of  Plato,  reckoned  immortality 
among  the  attributes  of  the  soul.  According  to  it  the 
soul,  being  imperishable  by  nature,  cannot  die,  does  not 
need  to  be  revived,  recreated,  to  attain  to  everlasting 
life.  By  death  it  is  delivered  from  the  prison  of  the 
body;  it  flees  to  the  celestial  regions,  and  naturally 
partakes  of  life  everlasting.  The  Greek  doctrine  of 
immortality  is  therefore  absolutely  independent  of  the 
Jewish  doctrine  of  the  resurrection.  They  were  at 
first  two  separate  currents,  starting  from  two  different 
sources.  But  the  Christian  teachers,  nourished  at  the 
same  time  by  Jewish  theology  and  Greek  philosophy, 
united  the  two  currents,  combined  the  two  doctrines. 


§  31.    LEVITISM. 

Judaism  is,  in  some  respects,  the  reverse  of  prophet- 
ism  as  it  appears  in  its  most  illustrious  representatives. 
The  latter  attributes  the  greatest  importance  to  the 
moral  life  and  law,  and  subordinates  to  them  all  the  ex- 
ternal practices  of  religion.  After  the  Exile,  on  the 
contrary,  a  capital  importance  was  attributed  to  the 
purely  ritualistic  Levitical  laws  and  external  worship. 
It  is  no  longer  the  spirit  and  the  life  that  play  the 
principal  part  as  in  the  prophets,  but  form  and  cere- 
mony. Compared  with  prophetical  spiritualism,  Juda- 
ism represents  the  formalistic  tendency.  This  is  the 
reason  why  we  shall  speak  of  Levitism  and  all  that  is 
connected  therewith,  before  speaking  of  the  moral  life. 

Ezekiel  marks  the  first  decisive  step  towards  the 
triumph  of  Levitism.  In  most  of  his  discourses,  it  is 
true,  the  prophetical  spirit  is  still  felt.     But  there  is  a 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  31.    LEVITISM.  277 

part  of  his  book,  beginning  with  chapter  xL,  that  has 
not  its  like  in  any  earlier  prophet.  This  portion  de- 
scribes the  restoration  of  Israel  from  the  Levitical  point 
of  view.  Instead  of  making  the  essence  of  piety  and 
the  hope  for  the  salvation  of  Israel  the  conversion  of 
the  heart,  the  knowledge  of  God,  the  practice  of  the 
duties  of  justice  and  charity,  the  prophet  here  bases  the 
grandest  expectations  upon  the  priesthood  and  external 
worship.  Ezekiel  was  at  once  a  priest  and  a  prophet ; 
so  also  his  book  is  the  expression  both  of  prophetism 
and  Levitism. 

The  fragment.  Lev.  xvii.  -xxvi.,  which  perhaps  origi- 
nated with  Ezekiel  or  one  of  his  disciples,  also  indi- 
cates a  two-fold  current.  In  chapters  xviii.  -xx.  moral 
laws  predominate.  In  the  other  chapters,  on  the  con- 
trary, are  found  almost  only  ritualistic  laws. 

The  prophets  who  arose  after  the  Exile,  and  who  by 
the  way  were  few  in  number,  were  all  partly  influ- 
enced by  the  Levitical  spirit.  Haggai  gives  his  atten- 
tion almost  exclusively  to  the  restoration  of  the  temple. ^ 
He  attributes  unusual  importance  to  the  part  of  the 
high-priest  Joshua.^  In  Zechariah  the  same  preposses- 
sions recur.3  But  the  Levitical  tendency  manifests 
itself  especially  in  Malachi.  He  calls  the  priest  a 
messenger  or  angel  of  Jehovah.*  The  first  and  greatest 
breach  of  loyalty  that  he  notices  is  the  presentation  of 
unclean  victims.^  Conversion  and  faithfulness  toward 
God  in  his  eyes  amount  to  the  regular  payment  of 
tithes.^ 

This  tendency  issues  in  document  C,  whose  legisla- 

1  i.  f.  2  i,  1^  12  ;  ii.  2,  4.  3  iii.  i_8  ;  iv.  1  ff.,  14  ;  vi.  9  ff. 

4  ii.  7  ;  comp.  Eccl.  v.  6.  s  i.  6.-14.  ^  m  7_io, 


278  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

tion  has  for  its  sole  object  the  regulation,  to  the  least 
details,  of  all  that  relates  to  the  sanctuary,  the  priest- 
hood, sacrifices,  Levitical  purity,  religious  feasts,  offer- 
ings, the  hierarchical  division  of  the  priesthood  and 
the  people.^  Even  the  historical  setting  of  this  docu- 
ment betrays  a  Levitical  tendency.  With  the  account 
of  creation  is  connected  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath;^ 
with  that  of  the  deluge,  the  prohibition  against  eating 
blood; 3  with  that  of  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham, 
the  practice  of  circumcision ;  *  with  that  of  the  exodus 
from  Eg3^pt,  the  institution  of  the  passover.^  Other 
narratives  of  this  document  are  intended  to  glorify  the 
priesthood,  or  inculcate  the  strict  observance  of  the 
ceremonial  laws.^  Thus  Wellhausen  could  say  that  in 
this  document  the  essential  thing  is  that  the  sacrifices 
be  offered  according  to  the  regulations:  at  the  lawful 
place,  at  the  lawful  time,  by  the  lawful  persons,  and 
according  to  lawful  procedure.'^  Reuss  has  said  less 
justly  that  the  important  thing  is  not  the  purit}^  of  the 
heart,  but  that  of  the  body  and  of  dishes.^ 

This  legislation  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  sought  to  apply, 
to  realize  in  practical  life.  Their  reform  affects  chiefly 
the  external  side  of  religion ;  they  give  the  greatest 
care  to  the  re-establishment  of  worship,  and  the  strict 
observance  of  all  the  Levitical  usages.^  The  Chroni- 
cles everywhere  take  for  granted  that  the  legislation  of 

1  Ex.  xxv.-xxxi.  17  ;  xxxv.-xl.  ;  Lev.  i.  -xvi.  ;  xxvii.  ;  Num.  i.-x. ; 
XV. ;  xviii.  f.  ;  xxviii.  -xxx.  ;  xxxv.  ^  Gen.  ii.  2  f. 

3  Gen.  ix.  4.  ^  Qgn.  xvii.  9  ff.  &  Ex.  xii.  1  ff. 

6  Lev.  X.  1  ff.  ;  Num.  xv.  32  ff.  ;  xvi.  1  ff.  ;  xvii.  1  ff. 

'  History,  p.  424.  «  Gesch.,  §  379. 

9  Ezra  iii.  3-7  ;  vi.  16-22 ;  viii.  15-36 ;  x.  17  ff. ;  Neh.  viii.  14-18  ; 
x.-xiii. 


THIRD  PERIOD. — §  31.    LEVITISM.  279 

document  C  has  been  in  force  since  the  days  of  Moses, 
and  nothing  appears  to  their  author  more  worthy  of 
mention  than  details  relating  to  Levitical  worship,  and 
especially  those  that  magnify  the  priesthood.  Accord- 
ing to  these  books  God  grants  his  special  blessing 
to  those  who  observe  the  Levitical  regulations,  and 
severely  punishes  those  who  transgress  them.^ 

This  Levitical  and  formalistic  tendency  only  grew 
with  time,  and  it  manifested  itself  in  a  thousand  differ- 
ent ways.  Fasting,  mourning,  tears,  sacritices,  absti- 
nence from  unclean  foods,  observance  of  holidays,  whose 
number  is  always  increasing,  constantly  take  higher 
and  higher  rank  in  Jewish  piety. ^  Righteousness 
largely  consists  in  this  purely  external  piety. ^  The 
profanation  of  sacred  things,  a  blow  aimed  at  the  Leviti- 
cal regulations,  — these  are  regarded  as  abominations.* 
Even  prayer  takes  a  formalistic  character.^  Thus  Eccle- 
siastes  already  feels  the  need  of  opposing  vain  repeti- 
tions in  prayer.^ 

Having  thus,  in  a  general  way,  described  the  devel- 

1  1  Chron.  vi.  31  ff.,  48  ff.,  54  ff.  ;  ix.  10-34  ;  xiii. ;  xv.  f.;  xxii.  -xxvi. ; 
xxviii.  f.;  2  Chron.  ii.-vii.  ;  viii.  12-16  ;  xi.  13-17  ;  xiii.  9-15  ;  xvii.  7-9  ; 
xix.  8-11  ;  XX.  3,  21  f.  ;  xxiii.  f.  ;  xxvi.  16-21  ;  xxix. -xxxi.  ;  xxxv. 

2  Ezra  viii.  21,  23  ;  x.  1,  9  ;  Neh.  i.  4 ;  ix.  1  ;  Esther  iv.  3,  16  ;  ix. 
19-32  ;  Dan.  i.  5-16  ;  ix.  3  ;  x.  3,  12  ;  Bar.  i.  5,  10 ;  Tob.  i.  6-8, 10-12  ; 
xii.  8  ;  1  Mace.  ii.  32-38,  46  ;  iii.  47  ;  iv.  47-59  ;  2  Mace.  i.  8  f.,  18-36  ; 
iii.  31-33;  vi.  6-11;  vii.  ;  viii.  26-28  ;  xii.  31  f.,  38,  43;  xiii.  12,  23; 
Judith  iv.  9-15  ;  viii.  6  ;  ix.  1. 

3  Tob.  i.  2  f .  ;  xii.  8  f. 

^  Ps.  Ixxiv.  3  ff.  ;  Dan.  v.  ;  vii.  25  f. ;  viii.  11-14  ;  ix.  27  ;  xii.  11 ; 
1  Maec.  i.  15,  21-28,  37,  41-64  ;  iii.  48-51 ;  iv.  36  ff.  ;  vi.  7  ;  2  Mace, 
iii.  18  ff.  ;  iv.  13-17  ;  v.  15  f . ;  vi.  1-7,  18  ff. ;  xii.  39-42  ;  xiii.  8 ;  xv. 
1-5,  18,  32  f. ;  Judith  iv.  2  f.  ;  viii.  21  ;  ix.  8. 

5  Dan.  vi.  10 ;  2  Mace.  iii.  19-21  ;  3  Mace.  i.  18  ;  ii.  1.  e  y.  1. 


230      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

opment  and  the  triumph  of  Levitisin,  it  is  time  to 
consider  in  detail  the  result  of  this  influence  upon 
worship. 

I.    The  Sanctuary. 

We  have  seen  how,  in  the  first  two  periods,  the 
multiplicity  of  places  of  worship  which  corresponds  to 
a  natural  and  legitimate  need  of  the  religious  senti- 
ment, favored  idolatry  and  necessitated  the  centraliza- 
tion of  worship,  and  how  the  way  was  prepared  for  this 
change,  and  it  was  partially  accomplished  by  the  erec- 
tion of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  the  overthrow  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes,  the  discovery  of  Deuteron- 
omy and  the  reform  of  Josiah,  finally  and  especially  by 
the  Babylonian  captivity  which  forever  put  an  end  to 
the  constantly  reviving  idolatry  of  Israel. 

In  the  documents  of  our  period  that  give  attention  to 
this  question  it  is  not  thought  necessary  to  defend  the 
centralization  of  worship  against  the  worship  of  the  high- 
places,  as  does  even  Deuteronomy.  Ezekiel  represents 
such  centralization  as  a  thing  to  be  taken  for  granted. ^ 
It  is  the  same  with  Haggai  and  Zechariah.^  Other 
documents  go  farther.  The  centralization  of  worship 
appears  in  them  not  only  as  an  accomplished  fact  but 
as  something  that  has  existed  ever  since  Moses.  This 
appears  even  in  chapters  xvii.  -  xxvi.  of  Leviticus,  and 
especially  in  the  legislation  of  document  C.  This  doc- 
ument, and  Chronicles  as  well,  presents  the  past  in  an 
altogether  ideal  light.  They  both  transfer  to  remote 
ages  what  exists   in  the  present,  or  even  what  their 

1  Chaps,  xl.-xliii.  2  Hag.  i.  f. ;  Zech.  iv.  9  f.  ;  vi.  12  f. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  — §  31.   LEVITISM.  281 

authors  would  like  to  see  exist.  It  is  therefore  not 
history  that  is  to  be  sought  in  them,  but  the  expression 
of  the  religious  ideas  of  the  time  when  they  were  edited. 
Let  us  see  what  were  these  ideas  respecting  the  sanc- 
tuary. 

Document  C  describes  in  detail  the  construction  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  desert,  as  well  as  the  furniture 
and  the  utensils  required  for  worship,  i  The  impossi- 
bility of  rearing  such  a  sanctuary  in  an  utter  desert  was 
long  ago  demonstrated.  Moreover,  not  the  least  trace 
of  it  has  been  found  in  early  documents.^  The  Chroni- 
cles, in  which  document  C  is  already  regarded  as  his- 
tory, alone  speak  of  it.^  But  we  have  more  to  do  than 
simply  to  establish  this  negative  result.  We  must 
inquire  after  the  religious  thought  that  the  authors  of 
the  narratives  that  speak  of  this  sanctuary  intended  to 
express. 

The  principal  idea  that  the  Israelites  always  con- 
nected with  the  places  of  worship  is  that  Jehovah  is 
present  at  them.  Since  he  is  king  of  his  people  he 
must  reside  in  the  midst  of  them.  Now  his  peculiar 
residence  is  the  sanctuary.  This  idea  is  expressed 
even  in  the  old  song,  Ex.  xv.  In  vv.  17  and  18  the 
mountainous  country  of  Canaan  is  called  the  heritage 
of  Jehovah,  into  which  he  will  lead  his  people,  and  the 
sanctuary,  doubtless  that  of  Zion,  the  abode  that  he  has 
prepared.  It  is  also  said  that  Jehovah  is  king  forever, 
evidently  in  the  midst  of  his  people,  where  he  resides 
and  exercises  his  sovereignty.  Elsewhere  Jehovah  in 
his  office  of  king  of  Israel  dwells  in  the  midst  of  the 

1  Ex.  XXV.  ff. ;  XXXV.  ff.  2  Wellhausen,  History,  pp.  39  ff. 

8  1  Chron.  xvi.  39 ;  xxi.  29 ;  2  Chron.  i.  3  ff. 


282  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

people,  and  especially  in  the  temple,  his  peculiar  resi- 
dence, his  throne,  or  more  generally  in  Mount  Zion  and 
at  Jerusalem.^  Isaiah,  in  a  vision,  sees  Jehovah,  the 
king,  seated  on  his  throne  in  the  sanctuary. ^ 

In  very  many  passages,  to  betake  one's  self  to  the 
sanctuary  is  synonjmious  with  presenting  one's  self 
before  Jehovah,  and  whatever  is  or  is  done  at  the  sanc- 
tuary is  or  is  done  before  Jehovah. ^  Consequently  the 
sanctuary  is  called  the  abode  of  Jehovah.^ 

This  fundamental  thought  of  the  religion  of  Israel, 
document  C  connects  with  the  portable  sanctuar}^ 
which  it  expressly  calls  the  abode  of  Jehovah,^  or  more 
briefly  the  abode. ^  It  says  that  there,  and  more  espe- 
cially over  the  ark,  between  the  two  cherubim,  is  where 
Jehovah  prefers  to  dwell,  in  the  midst  of  his  people, 
and  meet  them,  particularly  Moses,  to  give  them  his 
commands.'^  Since  the  place  for  the  ark  was  in  the 
holy  of  holies,^  this  was  more  especially  the  abode  of 
Jehovah.  Moreover,  this  is  nothing  new.  Even  in 
document  A  Jehovah  appears  to  Moses,  and  speaks  to 
him  in  the  tabernacle.^  According  to  other  old  passages, 
Jehovah  sits  above  the  ark  of  the  covenant  between  the 

1  Amos  i.  2  ;  Isa.  viii.  18  ;  xii.  6  ;  xxiv.  23  ;  Mic.  iv.  7  ;  Jer.  iii.  17  ; 
viii.  19 ;  Zeph.  iii.  14  f.  ;  Hab.  ii.  20 ;  Ezek.  xliii.  7  ;  Joel  iii.  16  f .  ; 
Ps.  xxiv.  3-10  ;  xlviii.  2  f.  ;  Ixviii.  24.  2  ig^.  vi.  1,  5. 

3  Ex.  xxiii.  17  ;  xxxiv.  23  f.  ;  Josh,  xviii.  8,  10;  Jud.  xi.  11  ;  xx.  1, 
23,  26  ;  xxi.  2,  6,  8 ;  1  Sam.  x.  3,  17  ;  xi.  15  ;  xv.  33  ;  xxi.  6  f.;  2  Sam. 
V.  3;  xxi.  7,  9  ;  Deut.  xii.  12  ;  xiv.  23,  26  ;  xvi.  11,  16  ;  xxvi.  5,  10 ; 
xxxi.  11 ;  etc.  ^  Deut.  xii.  5  ;  1  Kings  viii.  13  ;  Zech.  ii.  13. 

^  Lev.  XV.  31 ;  xvii.  4  ;  Num.  xvi.  9  ;  xvii.  13  ;  xix.  13  ;  xxxi.  30, 
47  ;  Josh.  xxii.  19.  e  ex.  xxvi.  1,  6,  12  f.,  15  ;  etc. 

7  Ex.  XXV.  8,  22  ;  xxix.  42-46;  xxx.  6,  36  ;  Num.  v.  3;  vii.  89; 
xvii.  4.  s  Ex.  xxvi.  33. 

^  Ex.  xxxiii.  7-11 ;  xxxiv.  34  f. ;  Num.  xii.  6  ff. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  31.    LEVITISM.  283 

cherubim.^     Finally  it  is  said  that,  in  the  temple   of 
Solomon,  the  ark  was  placed  in  the  holy  of  holies. ^ 

Document  C,  in  a  fashion  very  characteristic,  ex- 
presses the  idea  of  the  presence  of  Jehovah  in  the  midst 
of  his  people,  by  the  order  of  encampment  that  it  pre- 
scribes, during  the  journey  through  the  desert.  The 
portable  sanctuary  is  to  form  the  centre  of  the  camp; 
to  the  tribe  of  Levi  is  assigned  the  immediate  neigh- 
borhood of  the  sanctuary;  beyond  them,  on  all  sides, 
encamp  the  other  tribes,  in  a  perfectly  symmetrical 
arrangement.^  Those  who  consider  this  narrative  with 
historical  discrimination  can  see  in  it  only  a  fiction. 
An  encampment  so  regular,  during  the  entire  journe}^ 
through  the  desert,  was  physically  as  impossible  as  the 
preparation  of  the  magnificent  tabernacle  with  all  its 
accessories.  Thus  it  is  necessary  to  see  in  it  only  the 
symbolical  expression  of  religious  ideas  presented  in 
the  form  of  history.  This  camp  in  the  desert  repre- 
sents the  people  Israel,  in  the  midst  of  whom  Jehovah 
dwells,  in  the  tabernacle,  his  residence,  immediately 
surrounded  by  the  sacerdotal  tribe,  the  only  one  that 
has  the  right  to  be  in  direct  relation  with  him,  and  the 
one  that  serves  as  an  intermediary  between  him  and  the 
people. 

It  is  only  necessary  to  have  called  attention  to  the 
principal  religious  thought,  which  in  Israel  was  con- 
nected with  the  sanctuary.  For  the  details  of  the  tab- 
ernacle and  the  temple  we  refer  the  reader  to  archaeology 
Traditional  typology  has  tried  to  find  profound  thoughts, 
revelations,  predictions,  in  all  the  details  of  the  Israel- 
itish   sanctuary,   and   especially   of   the   tabernacle   so 

1  1  Sam.  iv.  4  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  2.  ^  1  Kings  viii.  6  f.  ^  Num.  ii. 


284  THEOLOGY  OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

minutely  described  in  document  C.^  But  these  mysti- 
cal and  often  eccentric  interpretations  have  no  founda- 
tion in  the  Scriptures.  Antiquity  proceeded  in  this 
respect  with  extreme  simplicity.  Moreover,  if  the 
author  of  document  C  had  really  attributed  to  the  sanc- 
tuary and  its  different  parts  the  significance  that  some 
have  believed  to  be  found  in  them,  he  would  have  said 
so  distinctly  and  even  repeatedly  in  order  to  attract 
attention  to  it,  as  he  does  Ex.  xxxi.  12-17  with  refer- 
ence to  the  significance  of  the  Sabbath. ^  The  best 
proof  that  the  ancients  were  not  devoted  to  this  mysti- 
cal typology,  so  much  cultivated  in  later  times,  is  that 
Solomon  had  the  work  on  the  temple  done  and  the  vari- 
ous sacred  objects  fashioned  by  foreign  laborers  and 
artists,^  who  certainly  had  no  profound  knowledge  of 
the  religion  of  Israel,  and  knew  still  less  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  which  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  find 
symbolized  in  the  sanctuary  of  the  old  covenant.  Doc- 
ument A  says  nothing  at  all  of  the  way  in  which  the 
tabernacle  was  constructed,  which  proves  that  it  attrib- 
uted no  importance  to  the  matter.  Afterward,  it  is 
true,  the  opinion  spread  that  the  temple,  like  the 
tabernacle,  and  the  sacred  objects  in  general,  had  been 
made  in  accordance  with  divine  instructions.*  But 
this  view,  represented  by  document  C  and  Chronicles, 
is  of  recent  date,  and  it  was  inspired  by  the  exaggerated 
value  that  was  placed  upon  external  worship,  and  all 
that  contributed  to  worship,  after  the  Exile.     It  is  easy 

1  Winer,  Beahmrterbiich,  art.  Stiftshutte  ;  Knobel,  Exodus  u.  Leviti- 
cus, pp.  251  ff.;  [Smith,  Dictionary,  art.  Tabernacle']. 

2  Knobel  as  above,  p.  253.  ^  i  Kings  v.  18  ;  vii.  13  ff. 
*  Ex.  XXV.  9,  40  ;  1  Cliron.  xxviii.  19. 


THIRD   PERIOD. — §31.    LEVITISM.  285 

to  understand  how  those  who  close  their  eyes  to  the 
surest  results  of  criticism,  and  believe  that  God  gave 
the  pattern  of  the  tabernacle  to  Moses  and  that  of  the 
temple  to  David,  are  led  to  seek  in  these  sanctuaries  as 
wholes,  and  in  each  of  their  details,  divine  thoughts, 
mysteries  of  revelation.  But  as  the  early  documents 
say  nothing  of  the  kind,  and  these  teachings  are  found 
only  in  late  documents,  which  generally  present  ancient 
history  in  a  very  ideal  and  unhistorical  light,  we  cannot 
adopt  this  course. 

IT.    The  Priesthood, 

We  have  seen  above  that  the  liberty  originally  per- 
mitted every  head  of  a  family  to  perform  sacerdotal 
functions,  was  little  by  little  limited  on  account  of  the 
abuses  that  it  occasioned,  and  that  the  tribe  of  Levi, 
from  which  the  priesthood  was  from  early  times  largely 
recruited,  by  the  legislation  of  Deuteronomy,  obtained 
the  exclusive  privilege  of  performing  these  functions. 
But  we  have  not  fonud  before  the  Exile  any  important 
difference  in  the  various  priests,  any  religious  hie- 
rarchy of  the  priesthood,  much  less  any  classification 
of  the  tribe  of  Levi  into  different  divisions  of  sacred 
persons.  According  to  Deuteronomy,  as  we  have  said, 
all  the  Levites  were  still  priests,  and  all  priests  of  the 
same  rank.  This  state  of  things  was  greatly  modified 
from  the  date  of  the  Exile. 

Here,  again,  it  is  Ezekiel  who  gives  the  first  impulse. 
He  makes  no  mention  of  the  high-priest,  it  is  true; 
but  he  establishes  the  distinction  between  priests  and 
Levites.  It  should,  however,  be  observed  that  he  es- 
tablishes it  only  in  the  legislation  which  he  proposes 


286  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

for  the  future ;  lie  speaks  of  it,  therefore,  as  something 
that  does  not  exist,  and  not  as  something  of  the  past  or 
the  present.  According  to  him  the  sons  of  Zadok 
alone  of  all  the  descendants  of  Levi,  are  to  exercise  the 
priestly  functions. ^  He  excludes  from  it  first,  strangers, 
the  uncircumcised,  and  that  in  terms  proving  that  pre- 
viously even  they  were  employed  in  the  service  of  the 
sanctuary.2  Further  he  excludes  from  it  the  unfaith- 
ful Levites,  who  had  devoted  themselves  to  idolatry, 
and  assigns  to  them  the  inferior  service  of  the  sanctu- 
ary. ^  We  find  here,  as  in  2  Kings  xxiii.  9,  where  there 
is  also  reference  to  a  degradation  of  unfaithful  priests, 
the  historical  reason  why  a  part  of  the  Levites  were 
excluded  from  the  priesthood,  and  the  starting  point 
for  the  distinction  between  priests  and  Levites. 

The  legislative  programme  of  Ezekiel  proves  that, 
during  the  Exile,  the  ground  was  prepared  for  a  new 
ecclesiastical  legislation,  forbidding  the  assumption  of 
the  priesthood  to  simple  Israelites,  and  even  making  a 
selection  in  the  tribe  of  Levi.  In  document  C,  in  fact, 
the  right  to  offer  sacrifices  is  granted  to  Aaron  and  his 
sons  exclusively  forever.*  -A.ny  other  Israelite,  even  a 
Levite,  who  presumes  to  perform  sacerdotal  functions 
is  threatened  with  death. ^  The  priests  are  several  times 
called  simply  sons  of  Aaron. ^  They  alone  are  to  bless 
the  people^  and  approach  God.^     Over  them  is  a  high- 

1  xL  46  ;  xliii.  19  ;  xliv.  15  ff.;  xlviii.  11. 

2  xliv.  7-9.  3  xliv,  10-14  ;  comp.  xlviii.  11. 
*  Ex.  xxviii.  1,  41  ;  xxix.  9,  44  ;  xl.  13-15  ;  Num.  iii.  3. 

5  Num.  iii.  10,  38  ;  iv.  15,  20  ;  xviii.  3,  7. 

6  Lev.  i.  5;  ii.  2  ;  iii.  5,  13  ;  vi.  14  ff.  ;  vii.  10,  33. 
■^  Num.  vi.  23  ;  comp.  Lev.  ix.  22. 

^  Num.  xvi.  5  ;  comp.  iv.  19  f. 


THIRD   PERIOD. §  31.    LEVITISM.  287 

priest,  or  anointed  priest.^  All  the  Levites  who  are  not 
descended  from  Aaron  are  placed  under  the  command  of 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  to  perform  the  inferior  service  of 
the  sanctuary.2  And  just  as  no  Levite  can  offer  sacrifice 
without  being  punished  with  death,  so  no  lajanan  can 
meddle  with  the  service  of  the  Levites  without  suffer- 
ing the  same  penalty.^  The  high-priest  can  come  into 
immediate  contact  with  God,  in  the  holy  of  holies  of 
the  sanctuary,  only  at  the  great  feast  of  atonement; 
he  is  threatened  with  death  if  he  transgresses  this  com- 
mandment.* 

According  to  this  legislation,  therefore,  God  with- 
draws himself  completely  from  the  eyes  of  his  people, 
from  whom  a  triple  sacerdotal  barrier  separates  him. 
The  high-priest  alone  has  the  right  to  approach  God, 
and  he  only  once  a  year.  "  In  him  alone  Israel  comes 
into  immediate  contact  with  Jehovah,  at  one  point,  for 
one  moment:  the  summit  of  the  pyramid  touches 
heaven."^  This  tendency  to  raise  an  insurmountable 
barrier  between  Jehovah  and  the  common  people  has 
its  rise  in  ancient  Israel.^  But  it  was  long  held  in 
check  by  the  powerful  current  of  prophetism,  which 
granted  to  every  Israelite  the  right  to  approach  God. 
Not  until  after  the  Exile,  when  prophetism  died  out, 
did  it  prevail.  In  characterizing  as  truly  "colossal" 
the  difference  between  the  former  view  and  that  ex- 
pressed in  document  C,  Wellhausen  justly  dwells  on 
the  following  point :   "  Samuel  the  Ephraimite,  when  on 

1  Num.  XXXV.  25,  28  ;  Lev.  xxi.  10  ;  viii.  12  ;  iv.  3,  5, 16  ;  Ex.  xxix.  7. 

2  Num.  iii.  6,  9  ;  viii.  19  ;  xviii.  2  ff.,  23. 

3  Num.  i.  51,  53  ;  viii.  19  ;  xviii.  22.  *  Lev.  xvi. 

*  Wellhausen,  History,  p.  149.        e  Ex.  xix.  21-25  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  6  ff. 


288  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

duty,  nightly  sleeps  near  the  ark  of  Jehovah  where, 
according  to  Lev.  xvi.,  the  high-priest  alone  has  the 
right  to  present  himself  once  a  year,  and  then  only  after 
the  strictest  preparation  and  the  performance  of  very 
elaborate  expiatory  ceremonies."^  Another  contrast 
that  deserves  more  particular  attention  because  the 
legislation  of  document  C  is  represented  as  Mosaic, 
might  be  noticed,  viz.  that  according  to  document  A 
Joshua,  an  Ephraimite  like  Samuel,^  and  a  mere  layman 
withal,  usuall}^  in  his  capacity  of  servant  of  Moses, 
stays  in  the  tabernacle  of  the  desert.^ 

The  author  of  document  C,  in  his  sacerdotal  legisla- 
tion, undoubtedly  had  an  excellent  object  in  view ;  he 
wished  to  help  put  an  end  to  the  abuses  that  favored 
idolatry.  But  the  radical  remedy  that  he  proposed, 
and  that  succeeded  only  too  well,  resulted  in  Jewish 
clericalism.  Though  he  helped  to  eradicate  idolatry, 
he  also  helped  to  stifle  religious  life  in  forms,  and  led 
the  religion  of  Israel  into  a  wrong  path  from  which 
the  gospel  alone  could  rescue  it. 

The  influence  that  document  C  exercised  on  matters 
in  general,  and  the  priesthood  in  particular,  shows 
itself  especially  in  the  books  of  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and 
Nehemiah.  The  priests  are  there  called  sons  of  Aaron. ^ 
Those  who  cannot  prove  their  descent  from  Aaron  are 
excluded  from  the  priesthood.^  Aaron  is  there  regarded 
as  the  first  high-priest.^  He  and  his  descendants  Avere 
set  apart  to  perform  the  duties  of  the  priesthood  forever, 

1  History,  p.  131.  2  ^um.  xiii.  8,  16.  3  Ex.  xxxiii.  11. 

*  1  Chron.  xv.  4  ;  2  Chron.  xiii.  9f.  ;  xxxi.  19 ;  xxxv.  14  ;  Neli.  x. 
38  ;  xii.  47.  &  Ezra  ii.  62  f.  ;  Neh,  vii.  64  f. 

6  Ezra  vii.  5, 


THIRD   PElllOD. — §  31.    LEYITISM.  289 

and  to  bless  the  people ;  ^  the  other  Levites  are  simple 
servants  of  the  priests,  charged  with  the  inferior  service 
of  the  sanctuary, 2  and  more  particularly  with  the  trans- 
portation of  the  ark  of  the  covenant.^  It  is  only  neces- 
sary to  compare  1  Chron.  xv.  with  2  Sam.  vi.  to  see  how 
the  history  of  times  past  was  transformed  to  the  eyes  of 
posterity,  who  imagined  that,  in  the  domain  of  worship, 
everything  had,  since  Moses,  been  done  according  to 
the  legislation  of  document  C. 

The  early  literature  contains  no  sacerdotal  theory,  no 
explanation  or  justification  of  the  existence  of  the  priest- 
hood. The  legislation  of  document  A  does  not  even 
speak  of  the  priesthood  at  all.  This  document  presup- 
poses its  existence  in  Israel  before  the  promulgation  of 
the  law.*  It  is  probable  that  in  early  times  no  need  of 
establishing  a  theory  on  this  subject  was  felt.  There 
were  priests  in  Israel  as  among  the  other  peoples,  be- 
cause the  common  people  feel  the  need  of  mediation 
between  themselves  and  the  Deity;  and  because  they 
seek  mediators,  who,  by  reason  of  their  peculiar  sanc- 
tity, find,  they  think,  more  ready  access  to  the  Deity. 
This  last  was  sufficiently  justified  hy  the  existence  of 
the  priesthood  everywhere  in  antiquity;  it  needed  no 
other  warrant. 

The  first  passages  that  claim  the  priesthood  for  the 
tribe  of  Levi  base  this  claim  solely  on  the  divine  elec- 
tion of  this  tribe. ^  Deuteronomy  itself,  in  its  latest 
portion,  though  it  gives  much  space  to  the  priesthood, 

1  1  Chron.  xxiii.  13  ;  vi.  49. 

2  1  Chron.  vi.  48  ;  ix.  17  ff.  ;  xxiii.  24  ff. 

3  1  Chron.  xv.  2,  15,  26 ;  2  Chron.  v.  4 ;  comp.  Num.  i.  50  ff.  ;  iv. 
15,  25  ff.,  31  ff.,  47.  4  Ex.  xix.  22,  24. 

^  Deut.  X.  8 ;  xxxiii,  8  ff. ;  1  Sam.  ii.  27  ff. 


290      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

contains  nothing  else  on  this  subject.^  Document  C, 
in  all  respects  theoretical,  is  the  first  to  give  a  sacerdo- 
tal theory.  It  is  not  content  with  emphasizing  the 
divine  election  of  the  priesthood, ^  it  seeks  reasons  for 
it.  It  declares  that  the  first-born  of  Israel  belong  to 
Jehovah,  because  they  were  spared  the  night  when  all 
the  first-born  of  the  land  of  Egypt  were  smitten.^  It 
says  that  Jehovah  takes  the  Levites  instead  of  the  first- 
born of  the  children  of  Israel.*  The  real  reason  for  the 
existence  of  the  priesthood,  according  to  this  document, 
is  that  Jehovah  is  too  holy  to  come  into  contact  with  a 
common  mortal.  All  that  it  says  about  the  priesthood 
tends  to  make  it  a  sacred  caste,  separate  from  the  rest 
of  the  people. 

There  is,  first,  the  ceremony  by  which  the  Levites 
are  consecrated.  Num.  viii.  5-22.  It  is  an  act  of  puri- 
fication (the  word  purification  itself  occurs  several  times 
in  the  account)  by  which  the  Levites  are  separated  from 
tlie  rest  of  the  children  of  Israel,  that  they  may  belong 
to  Jehovah.^  The  priests  are  consecrated  with  even 
more  solemnity  than  the  Levites ;  but  their  consecra- 
tion also  consists  of  acts  of  purification  and  sanctifica- 
tion  which  separate  the  priests  from  the  people,  that 
they  may  be  set  apart  for  the  service  of  Jehovah.^  A 
number  of  regulations  indicate  that  the  priests  are  to 
be  in  a  condition  of  peculiar  holiness.  Their  food  is 
to  consist  of  holy  things,  i.e.  things  devoted  to  God.^ 

1  Deut.  xviii.  5.  ^  Num.  xvi.  5  ;  xvii.  5  ff. 

3  Ex.  xiii.  2  ;  Num.  iii.  13  ;  viii.  17  ;  xviii.  15. 

4  Num.  iii.  12,  41,  45 ;  viii.  16,  18.  ^  Num.  viii.  14. 

6  Ex.  xxix.  1-37  ;  xl.  12-15  ;  Lev.  viii. 

7  Lev.  vi.  16  ff. ;  vii.  6  ;  x.  12  ff.  ;  etc. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  31.    LEVITISM.  291 

They  must  be  free  from  every  physical  defect,^  must 
not  marry  a  woman  who  has  been  debauched,  profaned, 
or  divorced, 2  must  abstain  from  all  mutilation  of  their 
bodies,^  and  can  defile  themselves  by  mourning  only  in 
exceptional  cases.*  During  the  performance  of  their 
functions  especially,  they  must  keep  themselves  Leviti- 
cally  perfectly  clean, ^  and  abstain  from  all  intoxicating 
drinks.^  Even  the  members  of  their  families  must  be 
clean ;  if  the  daughter  of  a  priest  becomes  a  harlot  she 
must  be  burned."  The  high-priest  in  whom  the  priest- 
hood reaches  its  culmination,  and  finds  its  most  perfect 
expression,  represents  at  the  same  time  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Israel  before  God.^  Thus  when  he  commits  a 
sin  all  the  people  are  guilty.^  He  must  receive  a  sep- 
arate consecration,  1^  and  wear  garments  which  by  their 
magnificence  help  to  enhance  the  splendor  of  his  ap- 
pearance. ^^  He  must  keep  himself  more  strictly  clean 
than  the  other  priests,  never  wearing  mourning,  nor 
marrying  any  but  a  virgin. ^^  Qn  account  of  this  pecu- 
liar holiness  he  may  enter  once  a  year  into  the  holy  of 
holies,  for  the  sake  of  making  atonement  for  the  whole 
people. ^^  When  he  is  clothed  in  his  sacerdotal  orna- 
ments he  wears  on  his  forehead  this  inscription: 
"Holiness  to  Jehovah,"  1*  which  denotes  the  superior 
sanctity  with  which  he  must  be  clothed  in  order  to 
worthily  represent  the  people  before  the  holy  God,  and 
the  holiness  required  by  this  God  of  the  entire  people.  ^^ 

1  Lev.  xxi.  16  ff.      2  j^ev.  xxi.  7  ;  comp.  Ezek.  xliv.  22.      ^  j^ev.  xxi.  5. 

*  Lev.  X.  6  ;  xxi.  1-4  ;  comp.  Ezek.  xliv.  25. 

5  Lev.  xxii.  1-9.        e  Lev.  x.  8-10.  '^  Lev.  xxi.  9. 

8  Ex.  xxviii.  9-12,  21  ff.,  29,  36-38.  9  Lev.  iv.  3. 

10  Lev.  viii.  n  Ex.  xxviii.  2  ff.  12  Lev.  xxi.  10-15. 

1*  Lev.  xvi.  1*  Ex.  xxviii.  36  ff.  i^  Lev.  xi.  44. 


292  THEOLOGY  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Though  all  these  regulations  are  found  only  in  docu- 
ment C,  we  must  not  conclude  that  they  were  all  so 
many  innovations.  If  we  omit  details,  and  grasp  the 
essence  of  these  regulations,  we  surely  find  in  them  the 
expression  of  the  idea  that  was  always  connected  with 
the  priesthood  in  Israel,  viz.  that  it  was  peculiarly 
holy,  and  that  in  consequence  it  enjoyed  the  privilege 
of  approaching  God,  which  the  laity  did  not  possess. 
We  have  seen  that,  in  ancient  times,  this  sacerdotal 
prerogative  was  but  imperfectly  developed  in  Israel; 
but  that  it  continually  grew  and  reached  its  apogee 
after  the  Exile ;  and  that  it  finds  its  legal  sanction  in 
document  C. 


III.   Religious  Festivals. 

1.  The  Sahhath.  —  Originally  the  religious  festivals 
in  Israel  were  of  a  very  simple  character;  they  were 
chiefly  related  to  nature  and  agriculture ;  but  in  time 
this  simplicity  was  lost,  giving  place  to  more  theocratic 
conceptions  and  more  Levitical  practices.  We  have 
already  been  able  to  show  to  some  extent  that  this  was 
the  case ;  we  shall  here  make  it  more  decidedly  appar- 
ent. The  institution  and  the  celebration  of  the  Sab- 
bath, as  they  were  conceived  by  Judaism,  iurnish  at  once 
new  proof  of  it. 

We  have  seen  that  the  humanitarian  object  of  the 
Sabbath,  the  rest  to  be  granted  to  everybody  on  this 
day,  is  the  one  most  emphasized  in  the  early  documents. 
Yet  the  day  had,  from  the  start,  a  religious  character. 
This   appears    from    the   decalogue,    where   we    read: 


THIRD   PERIOD. §  31.    LEVITISM.  293 

"The  seventh  day  is  a  Sabbath  to  Jehovah,  thy  God.''^ 
Document  C  says  expressly,  only  reproducing,  how- 
ever, the  thought  of  the  decalogue,  that  the  Sabbath  is 
a  day  consecrated  to  Jehovah. ^  The  decalogue  says 
further  that  the  Sabbath  should  be  sanctified,  set  apart, 
i,e.  distinguished  from  the  other  days.^  Document  C 
declares,  finally,  that  it  must  be  for  Israel  a  holy 
thing.*  Thus  the  Sabbath  must  be  a  day  distinct  from 
the  other  days,  and  consecrated  to  Jehovah.  Israel 
belongs  to  Jehovah;  they  are  his  property,  they  must 
give  to  him  their  life  and  their  time.  But,  since  the 
exigencies  of  ordinary  life  do  not  allow  them  to  conse- 
crate all  the  days  to  their  God,  they  must  consecrate  to 
him  at  least  one  day  of  each  week.  The  Sabbath,  by  its 
frequent  recurrence,  constantly  reminds  Israel  that  they 
belong,  that  they  are  entirely  consecrated,  to  the  God 
of  the  covenant.^ 

Ezekiel  adds  to  this  conception  of  the  Sabbath  a  new 
element,  which  is  reproduced  in  document  C,  viz.  that 
the  Sabbath  is  a  token  between  Jehovah  and  his  people, 
a  token  that  Jehovah  is  the  God  of  his  people,  and  that 
he  sanctifies  them,  i.e.  sets  them  apart  that  he  may 
make  them  his  peculiar  people.^  In  this  way  the  Sab- 
bath is  brought  into  intimate  relation  with  the  funda- 
mental thought  of  the  religion  of  Israel;  it  becomes 
the  token  of  the  covenant  between  Jehovah  and  Israel." 

Though  the  early  prophets  speak  little  of  the  Sabbath, 

1  Ex.  XX.  10  ;  Deut.  v.  14.  2  Ex.  xxxi.  15. 

3  Ex.  XX.  8  ;  Deut.  v.  12.  *  Ex.  xxxi.  14. 

s  Dillmann  on  Ex.  xx.  9  f. ;  Riehm,  Handworterhuch,  p.  1309  ; 
[Smith,  Dictionary,  art.  SahhatK]. 

6  Ezek.  XX.  12,  20  ;  Ex.  xxxi.  13,  17.  7  Ex,  xxxi.  10. 


294  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

and  attach  no  great  importance  to  the  celebration  of 
feast-days  in  general,  ^  it  is  otherwise  in  the  prophets 
of  the  Exile,  who  strict^  enjoin  the  celebration  of  the 
Sabbath,  and  severely  reprove  transgressors  of  this 
divine  ordinance. ^  In  this  respect,  as  in  so  many  others, 
the  formalistic  tendency  gained  ground  at  the  time  of 
the  Exile,  even  among  the  prophets,  and  afterwards 
completely  got  the  upper  hand.  Document  C  prohibits 
even  the  most  indispensable  household  employments  on 
the  Sabbath,^  though  there  is  no  trace  of  such  strictness 
in  the  oldest  documents,  and  it  pronounces  the  penalty 
of  death  upon  those  who  do  an}^  work  on  this  day.*  It 
represents  the  Sabbath  as  a  holiday  from  primitive  times, 
and  as  the  fundamental  religious  festival,  making  its 
institution  date  from  the  creation.^  According  to  the 
passages  cited,  the  Sabbath  derived  its  origin  from  the 
rest  that  God  took  on  the  seventh  day,  after  having 
created  in  six  days  the  heavens  and  the  earth.  But 
this  reason  for  the  celebration  of  the  Sabbath  itself  pre- 
supposes the  idea  of  the  Sabbath ;  it  dates  from  a  time 
more  recent  than  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath.^ 
Wellhausen  remarks  that  it  would  not  be  possible  to 
apply  to  the  Sabbath,  as  document  C  conceives  it,  the 
words  of  Jesus,  that  the  Sabbath  was  made  for  man, 
that  it  is  rather  a  statute  asserting  itself  with  the 
severity  of  a  natural  law,  which  finds  in  itself  the  reason 
for  its  existence,  and  to  which  God  himself  must  submit." 

1  Hos.  ii.  11 ;  i.  13. 

2  Jer.  xvii.  21-27  ;  Ezek.  xx.  12  f.,  20  f.,  24  ;  xxii.  8,  26  ;  xliv.  24 ; 
Isa.  Ivi.  2  ;  Iviii.  13  ;  Ixvi.  23.  3  Ex.  xvi.  23  ;  xxxv.  2. 

4  Ex.  xxxi.  14  f.  ;  xxxv.  2  ;  Num.  xv.  32-36. 

5  Gen.  ii.  2  f.  ;  Ex.  xxxi.  17  ;  xx.  11. 

6  Dillmann  on  Ex.  xx.  11.  ''  History,  p.  115. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  31.    LEVITISM.  295 

It  appears  that  even  anciently  sacrifices  were  offered, 
and  people  gathered  in  religious  assemblies  on  the 
Sabbath  day,^  although  the  old  documents  hardly  speak 
of  it.  Ezekiel,  on  the  contrary,  gives  us  to  under- 
stand that  sacrifices  must  be  offered  on  this  day.^ 
Document  C  describes  the  character  of  these  sacrifices ;  ^ 
it  also  ordains  that  the  shewbread  be  renewed  on  this 
day,^  and  a  holy  convocation  gathered.^  Thus  we  see 
that  the  Sabbath  gradually  lost  its  primitive  character, 
and  took  a  more  Levitical  color.  When  Leviticus,  in 
the  last  passage  cited,  seems  to  require  cessation  from 
labor  on  the  Sabbath  day,  that  there  may  be  leisure  for 
worship  and  religious  edification,  this  is  another  new 
view,  a  view  too  spiritual  for  remote  antiquity,  one 
that  can  only  have  been  formed  at  a  comparatively 
recent  date.^ 

The  Chronicler  supposes  that  the  legislation  of  doc- 
ument C  was  known  and  observed  from  the  remotest 
antiquity.'''  Nehemiah  was  obliged  to  take  energetic 
measures  to  secure  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  for 
it  was  violated  in  the  grossest  fashion. ^  In  the  time 
of  the  Maccabees  the  Jews,  on  one  occasion,  allowed 
themselves,  with  their  wives  and  children,  to  be  massa- 
cred rather  than  take  arms  on  the  Sabbath;  but  after 
this  first  sad  experience  they  decided  not  to  do  so  in 
the  future.^  "Based  on  the  sacerdotal  legislation,  the 
celebration  of  the  Sabbath  in  the  midst  of  Judaism  was 
logically  developed,  and  continually  approximated  to 

1  Isa.  i.  13.        2  xlv.  17.        ^  Num.  xxviii.  9  f .        ^  Lev.  xxiv.  5-8. 
5  Lev.  xxiii.  3.  ^  Dillmann  on  Ex.  xx.  9  f. 

7  1  Chron.  xxiii.  31 ;  2  Chron.  ii.  4  ;  viii.  13  ;  xxxi.  3  ;  Neh.  x.  33. 

8  Neh.  xiii.  15-22,  ^  1  Mace.  ii.  32-41 ;  ix.  43  ft 


296  THEOLOGY  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

the  ideal  of  absolute  rest;  so  that  the  most  rigid  party 
among  the  Pharisees  thought  the  entire  week  necessary 
to  preparation  for  the  holy  day,  and  that,  if  possible, 
the  half  of  human  life  was  to  be  devoted  to  it.  '  From 
Sunday  onward  think  of  the  Sabbath, '  says  Shammai."  ^ 

2.  The  Sabbatical  Year.  —  Thus  far  we  have  not 
spoken  of  the  sabbatical  year,  though  it  is  mentioned 
even  in  document  A.  But  since,  outside  of  some  legal 
passages,  it  does  not  appear  in  the  early  history  of 
Israel,  it  may  be  concluded  that  it  did  not  play  an 
important  part. 

Document  A  confines  itself  to  saying  that  every 
seven  years  the  land  shall  remain  fallow,  that  the  spon- 
taneous product  of  the  fields  shall  be  left  to  the  poor 
and  to  the  animals,  and  that  it  shall  be  so  even  with  the 
vine  and  the  olive. ^  The  sabbatical  year,  then,  has 
here  an  essentially  humanitarian  character,  like  the 
weekly  Sabbath.  In  Deuteronomy  it  preserves  this 
character  though  it  is  presented  in  a  new  light.  It 
there  appears  as  a  year  of  release,  in  which  Israelitish 
debtors  shall  not  be  required  to  pay  their  debts. ^ 
Moreover,  during  the  feast  of  tabernacles  of  this  year, 
the  law  shall  be  read  to  all  Israel  gathered  at  the  sanc- 
tuary.* For  Ezekiel  also  this  year  is  chiefly  a  year  of 
release.^ 

Document  C  takes  exactly  the  same  view  of  the  sab- 
batical year  as  of  the  weekly  Sabbath.  Every  seven 
years  the  country  must  rest,  that  this  may  be  a  Sabbath 
to  Jehovah.^     The  fields  are  not  to  be  sowed,  and  the 

1  Weimausen,  History,  p.  116.  2  Ex.  xxiii.  10  f. 

3  Deut.  XV.  1  ff.  •*  Deut.  xxxi.  10  f.  ^  xlvi.  17. 

6  Lev.  XXV,  2  ff. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  31.    LEVITISM.  297 

vine  is  not  to  be  pruned,  the  spontaneous  products  are 
not  to  be  harvested,  but  they  are  to  be  gathered  as  there 
is  need  of  them.^  The  product  of  the  soil  is  therefore 
no  longer  left  to  the  poor  and  the  beasts  of  the  field, 
as  document  A  prescribes ;  the  owner  is  himself  author- 
ized to  harvest  for  his  own  support  and  the  support  of 
his  house,  what  the  soil  spontaneously  produces.  In 
order  to  induce  the  people  to  observe  this  law  Jehovah 
promises  to  grant  a  particularly  abundant  harvest  the 
sixth  year.*^  The  idea  of  the  weekly  Sabbath  then  is 
here  extended  to  an  entire  year,  and  to  the  soil  of  the 
whole  country,  which  is  to  celebrate  a  Sabbath  in  honor 
of  Jehovah,  the  real  owner  of  the  soil,  who  has  given 
it  to  Israel.^ 

This  thought,  that  the  land  of  Canaan  belongs  to 
Jehovah,*  who  gives  it  to  his  people,^  always  existed 
in  Israel ;  but  the  institution  of  the  sabbatical  year,  as 
it  is  represented  in  document  C,  on  the  basis  of  this 
thought,  seems  to  be  of  recent  date.  We  see  even  from 
this  document  as  well  as  others,  that  before  the  Exile, 
the  sabbatical  year  was  not  observed  in  conformity  with 
these  regulations.^  Riehm  declares  that  in  reality  it 
was  impossible  to  observe  it  thus ;  that,  moreover,  in 
the  legislation  of  document  A,  it  is  presented  in  an- 
other and  more  reasonable  form;  that  there  the  com- 
mand is  not  that  all  the  Israelitish  lands  shall  remain 
fallow  the  same  year,  but  only  that  each  field  shall  be 
so  treated  once  in  seven  years,  so  that  thus  they  could 

1  Lev.  XXV.  3-7.  2  Lev.  xxv.  18-22.  3  Lev.  xxv.  2,  23. 

*  Hos.  ix.  3  ;  Josh.  xxii.  19 ;  Jer.  ii.  7  ;  Ps.  x.  16. 

5  Gen.  XV.  18-21  ;  xxvi.  3  f.  ;  Ex.  xxiii.  20-31 ;  Lev.  xiv.  34 ;  xx. 
24 ;  xxiii.  10  ;  Num.  xiii.  2  ;  Ps.  cxxxv.  12. 

6  Lev,  xxvi,  34  f.,  43  j  S  Chroii,  xxxvi.  21. 


298  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

be  allowed  to  rest  successively  instead  of  simultane- 
ously.^ Reuss  and  Wellhausen  take  the  same  view  of 
the  matter.  2 

We  know  also  that,  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  it  was 
agreed  to  observe  this  year  as  a  year  of  release,^  and  that 
in  the  days  of  the  Maccabees,  it  was  observed  as  a 
sabbatical  year,  but  not  without  danger  of  scarcity.* 

3.  The  Year  of  Jubilee.  —  The  year  of  jubilee,  of 
which  mention  is  made  in  document  C,  is  very  analo- 
gous to  the  sabbatical  year.  It  is  only  the  develop- 
ment, and  as  it  were  complement,  of  the  latter.  It  is 
in  reality  a  sabbatical  year,  which,  however,  occurs 
only  every  fifty  years,  after  every  seventh  sabbatical 
year.^  It  is,  besides,  a  year  of  liberty,  of  release,  a 
year  when  every  one  recovers  possession  of  his  own 
estate,  and  returns  to  his  own  family.^  In  the  year  of 
jubilee,  in  fact,  all  alienated  property  must  be  restored 
to  the  original  owner, ''  and  every  Israelite,  whom  pov- 
erty has  reduced  to  servitude,  must  regain  his  liberty.^ 
What  is  the  reason  for  this  twofold  requirement? 

Jehovah  is  the  real  owner  of  the  country,  and  the 
Israelites  are  with  him  as  strangers  and  guests.^  None 
of  them  has  the  right  to  alienate  what  he  has  received 
from  his  God;  he  can  sell  only  the  usufruct,  and  that 
only  until  the  year  of  jubilee,  when  all  property  returns 
to  its  lawful  owner.  But  if  Jehovah  is  sole  proprietor 
of  the  land  of  Canaan,  he  is  also  the  sole  master  of  the 
Israelites ;  they  became  his  servants  from  the  day  when 

1  Handwdrterhuch^  pp.  1813  ff. 

2  Reuss,  Hist.  Sainte,  I.  p.  176  ;  Wellhausen,  History,  pp.  116  ff. 

3  Neh.  X.  31.  4  1  Mace.  vi.  49,  53.  ^  ^ev.  xxv.  8  f.,  11  f. 

6  Lev.  xxv.  10.       7  Lev.  xxv.  14-17,  23-24.  »  Lev.  xxv.  39-55. 

» Lev.  xxv.  23. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  31.    LEVITISM.  299 

he  brought  them  forth  from  the  land  of  Egypt.  ^  They 
can  therefore  no  longer  be  the  slaves  of  any  one ;  they 
can  only,  in  case  of  necessity,  make  themselves  hire- 
lings until  the  year  of  jubilee,  when  they  will  once 
more  recover  their  liberty. 

This  year  must  be  sanctified  by  the  Israelites  or  be 
holy  for  them,^  i.e.  it  must  be  distinguished  from  the 
other  years  as  a  year  apart,  having  a  sacred  character. 

We  nowhere  find  that  the  year  of  jubilee  was  cele- 
brated. This  fact  is  easy  to  understand.  It  would 
have  been  necessary  to  leave  the  fields  fallow  two  con- 
secutive years,  since  the  year  of  jubilee  must  always 
follow  a  sabbatical  year.  But  it  was  difficult  to  ob- 
serve even  the  latter.  How  could  the  other  be  cele- 
brated after  it?  Here,  as  elsewhere,  appears  the  theo- 
retical tendency  of  document  C.  A  theory  was  formed 
without  an}^  anxiety  about  the  facts,  the  practical  life. 
The  systemizing  spirit  is  allowed  free  rein,  without 
regard  to  Avhat  is  humanly  possible. 

4.  The  Neiv  Moon.  —  We  know  that,  from  early 
times,  the  new  moon  was  a  holiday  in  Israel.  Docu- 
ment C  presupposes  the  existence  of  it  (and  this  is  the 
case  wherever  there  is  reference  to  it  throughout  the 
Old  Testament) ;  it  does  not  speak  of  its  institution  as 
it  does  of  that  of  most  of  the  other  Israelitish  festivals. 
It  mentions  this  festival  only  to  ordain  that  its  solem- 
nity shall  be  enhanced  by  the  sound  of  the  trumpet,^ 
and  to  describe  the  sacrifices  that  must  be  offered  when  it 
occurs.*    The  Chronicler  speaks  of  it  in  the  same  way.^ 

1  Lev.  XXV.  42,  55.  2  Lev.  xxv.  10-12. 

3  Num.  X.  10.  4  Num.  xxviii.  11-15. 

5  1  Chron.  xxiii.  31 ;  2  Chron.  ii.  4  ;  viii.  13  ;  xxxi.  3 ;  Neli.  x.  33. 


300  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Document  C,  however,  institutes  a  festival  for  the 
first  day  of  tlie  seventh  month,  with  directions  to  cele- 
brate it  more  solemnly  than  the  other  new  moons,  as  a 
great  feast-day  on  which  there  shall  be  a  summons  by 
trumpets,  a  holy  convocation,  and  special  sacrifices, 
besides  the  sacrifices  of  the  other  new  moons.  ^ 

This  enhanced  solemnity  of  the  seventh  new  moon 
proves  that  the  idea  of  the  Sabbath  is  applied  to  the 
months  as  to  the  years,  and  that  the  seventh  month  of 
the  year  is  in  a  sense  a  sabbatical  month.  But  every- 
thing favors  the  belief  that  this  festival,  like  the  year 
of  jubilee,  is  introduced  into  document  C  simply  that 
the  sabbatical  system  may  be  more  complete,  and  may 
extend  to  the  months  as  well  as  to  the  years  and  the 
days.  In  the  early  documents  no  trace  of  it  is  to  be 
found. 

5.  The  Pilgrim  Feasts.  —  We  have  already,  under  the 
first  period,  considered  the  essential  features  of  these 
great  pilgrim  feasts.  It  remains  for  us  to  notice  here 
some  features  peculiar  to  the  documents  of  our  period. 

a.  Ezekiel,  in  his  proposed  legislation,  speaking 
of  the  feast  of  the  passover,  describes  especially  the 
number  of  sacrifices  that  the  prince  is  to  offer  every 
day,  during  the  paschal  week.^  Document  C  gives 
much  attention  to  this  feast. ^  It  differs  in  certain 
respects  from  the  earliest  codes.  Thus  it  ordains  that 
the  paschal  victim  shall  be  eaten  in  every  house,  and 
that  all  shall  partake  of  it,*  while  the  older  codes 
prescribed  that  the  passover  should  be  sacrificed   and 

1  Lev.  xxiii.  23-25  ;  Num.  xxix.  1-6.  2  xlv.  21-24. 

3  Ex.  xii.  1-20,  43-49  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  5  ff. ;  Num.  ix.  1  ff. ;  xxviii. 
16-25.  4  Ex.  xii.  3  ff.,  46. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  31.    LEVITISM.  301 

eaten  at  the  sanctuary,  whither  only  the  male  and 
adult  Israelites  resorted.  It  also  requires  that  the  flesh 
of  the  paschal  victim  be  roasted  and  not  boiled,  ^  that 
not  only  the  seventh  but  also  the  first  day  be  a  holiday,  ^ 
and  that  sacrifices  be  offered  every  day  during  the  pas- 
chal week ;  ^  this  last  feature  we  found  only  in  Ezekiel. 
It  declares  that  the  stranger  who  wishes  to  partake  of 
the  passover  must  allow  himself  to  be  circumcised,* 
and  that  every  Israelite  is  obliged  to  celebrate  it  every 
year;  that  he  who  neglects  to  do  so  shall  be  punished 
with  death,  and  that  he  who  is  prevented  from  celebrat- 
ing it  at  the  date  fixed  must  celebrate  it  a  month  later. ^ 

Here  again  we  can  trace  the  influence  of  document 
C  upon  the  author  of  Chronicles.  It  is  only  necessary 
to  compare  2  Kings  xxiii.  21  ff.  with  2  Chron.  xxxv. 
Both  passages  speak  of  the  celebration  of  the  passover 
under  Josiah,  as  it  had  not  been  celebrated  from  time 
immemorial.  But  the  second  account  differs  from  the 
first,  in  that  it  introduces  all  sorts  of  details,  for  the 
purpose  of  representing  this  celebration  in  a  way  to 
make  it  conform  to  the  regulations  of  document  C.  On 
one  point,  however,  the  author  seeks  to  reconcile  this 
lattei  with  Deuteronomy.  While,  according  to  the  one, 
the  flesh  of  the  paschal  victim  is  to  be  roasted  and 
according  to  the  other  it  is  to  be  boiled,  the  Chronicler 
causes  to  be  prepared  for  the  passover  both  roasted  and 
boiled  meats. ^ 

h.    Respecting   the  feast  of  weeks  it  is  in  order  to 

1  Ex.  xii.  8  f . 

2  Ex.  xii.  12,  16  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  7  f.  ;  Num.  xxviii.  18,  25. 

3  Num.  xxviii.  19-24.  *  Ex.  xii.  44-48.  &  Num.  ix.  10-13. 
6  2  Chron.  xxxv.  13, 


302  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT. 

make  a  preliminary  observation  on  the  name  that  it 
bears  in  the  three  principal  documents  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, ^  and  on  the  number  of  weeks,  seven,  that  must 
separate  it  from  the  feast  of  the  passover.^  Must  we 
not  conclude  from  this  name  and  number  that  this 
feast  had  an  astronomical,  before  it  took  an  agricultural, 
character,  and  that  it  was  first  the  feast  of  the  seven 
weeks  before  becoming  the  feast  of  the  end  of  the  har- 
vest, or  the  day  of  the  first-fruits?^  This  period  of 
seven  weeks  recalls,  moreover,  the  feast  of  the  seventh 
new  moon,  the  sabbatical  year,  and  the  year  of  jubilee. 
And  it  is  clear  that  the  same  system  that  underlies  the 
week  of  seven  days  with  its  Sabbath  is  extended  to  all 
the  other  divisions  of  time:  the  seventh  day  of  the 
week  is  the  Sabbath,  the  seventh  week  counting  from 
the  passover  is  closed  by  the  feast  of  weeks,  the  seventh 
new  moon  is  celebrated  in  a  peculiarly  solemn  way,  the 
seventh  year  is  a  sabbatical  year,  and  finally,  after  seven 
sabbatical  years,  occurs  the  year  of  jubilee;  then  the 
cycle  is  complete. 

Beyond  these  general  observations  we  have  little  to 
say  of  the  feast  in  question,  which,  moreover,  never  had 
the  importance  of  the  other  two  pilgrim  feasts.  Thus 
the  prophet  Ezekiel  does  not  even  mention  it  in  his 
proposed  Levitical  legislation,  complete  as  that  is. 
And  in  the  earliest  literature  there  is  never  any  refer- 
ence to  it  outside  of  the  legal  passages  of  documents  A 
and  B. 

The  few  new  points  on  this  subject,  contained  in 
document  C,  are  the  following :  The  feast  of  weeks  shall 

1  Ex.  xxxiv.  22  ;  Deut.  xvi.  10,  16  ;  Num.  xxviii.  26. 

2  Deut.  xvi.  9  f.j  Lev.  xxiii.  15  f.  ^  Num.  xxviii.  26. 


THIRD    PERIOD.  — §31.    LEVITISM.  303 

be  consecrated  to  rest,  and  on  this  day  there  shall  be  a 
holy  convocation ;  i  the  offerings  to  be  made,  far  from 
being  left  to  the  inclination  of  each  worshipper,  or  pro- 
portioned to  the  divine  blessing  received,  as  in  Deuter- 
onomy, are  strictly  regulated ;  2  it  is  prescribed  among 
other  things  that  an  expiatory  sacrifice  shall  be  offered, 
and  certain  fixed  contributions  paid  to  the  priests,  ^ 
while  Deuteronomy  makes  this  feast  a  joyful  feast  and 
urges  that  the  Levites  be  invited  to  the  public  meal 
with  the  poor;  the  special  offering  at  this  feast,  which 
best  expresses  its  agricultural  character,  is  the  offering 
of  two  loaves.* 

c.  According  to  the  early  documents,  the  date  of  the 
feast  of  tabernacles  had  to  be  regulated  solely  by  the 
autumn  harvests,  which  vary  from  one  year  to  another. 
Ezekiel  is  the  first  to  mention  the  fifteenth  day  of  the 
seventh  month  as  a  fixed  date  for  this  feast ;  he  main- 
tains the  duration  of  the  feast  at  seven  days,  but  he 
prescribes  expiatory  sacrifices,  which  hardly  agree  with 
the  joyous  character  that  this  feast  seems  always  to 
have  had  before  the  Exile. ^ 

Document  C  here  introduces  innovations  more  nu- 
merous and  more  important.  According  to  it  the  feast 
of  tabernacles  must  last  eight  days  instead  of  seven, 
and  on  the  first  as  well  as  the  last  day  there  must  be 
a  holy  convocation  and  a  day  of  rest.^  More  than  this, 
document  C  inclines  to  rob  this  feast  of  its  agricultural 
character,    and  impress  upon   it  a  theocratic  one.     It 

1  Lev.  xxiii.  21 ;  Num.  xxviii.  26. 

2  Lev.  xxiii.  16  ff.;  Num.  xxviii.  26  ff. 

3  Lev.  xxiii.  19  f.;  Num.  xxviii.  30.  *  j^gv.  xxiii.  17. 
*  Ezek.  xlv.  26.                                    6  Lev.  xxiii.  33-36,  39  ff. 


304  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

ordains  that  it  be  celebrated  forever  in  honor  of  Jeho- 
vah, in  order  that  all  future  generations  may  know  that 
he  caused  the  children  of  Israel  to  dwell  in  tents  after 
having  freed  them  from  the  land  of  Egypt.  ^  But  the 
booths  of  branches,  which  are  evidently  of  rural  char- 
acter, thus  lose  their  primitive  significance.  We  see 
that  the  benefits  of  nature,  which  so  deeply  impressed 
the  ancient  Israelites,  no  longer  had  the  same  value  for 
the  Jews,  who  more  highly  prized  theocratic  advan- 
tages. Document  C  prescribes  that  at  this  feast  a 
much  larger  number  of  sacrifices  be  offered  than  at  the 
others ;  moreover,  according  to  its  custom,  it  regulates 
everything,  and  leaves  nothing  to  the  inclination  of  the 
individual. 2  In  the  time  of  Ezra  these  regulations 
began  to  be  observed,  but  it  was  well  known  that  pre- 
viously this  feast  had  not  been  celebrated  in  the  same 
manner.^ 

6.  TJie  Day  of  Atonement.  —  The  day  of  atonement 
seems  to  be  an  innovation  of  document  C.  There  is 
not  to  be  found  the  slightest  trace  of  it  in  earlier  docu- 
ments. Ezekiel  offers  at  most  a  few  hints  that  may 
have  suggested  such  a  festival.*  The  need  of  celebrat- 
ing a  great  day  of  fasting  and  atonement  was  undoubt- 
edly suggested  by  the  catastrophe  of  the  Exile,  which 
made  the  feeling  of  the  guilt  of  the  entire  people  weigh 
heavily  upon  the  conscience,  and  led,  as  we  have  seen, 
to  the  institution  of  several  days  of  fasting. 

The  day  of  atonement,  or  of  the  great  propitiation, 
must  be  the  tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month,  and  a  day 
of  rest  and  fasting;    it  must  be  celebrated  by  a  holy 

1  Lev.  xxiii.  41-43.  2  ;^T^^m.  xxix.  12-39. 

3  Ezra  iii.  4  ;  Neli.  viii.  13-18.  ^  xlv.  18-20. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  — §  31.    LEVITISM.  30r> 

convocation,  and  a  series  of  sacrifices. i     It  should  be 
observed  that  this  is  the  only  occasion  for  which  the 
law  ordains  fasting,  and  here  it  is  undoubtedly  meant 
to  be  an  expression  of  the  feelings  of  contrition  and 
humility  that  should  fill  the  heart  on  that  day.     The 
special  regulations  for  this  festival  are  enumerated  at 
length   in   the  sixteenth  chapter  of   Leviticus  which 
treats  especially  of  this  subject.     We  there  learn  that 
on  the  day  of  atonement  the  high-priest,  in  fulfilling 
his  functions,  must  put  on,    not  his  ornaments,  but  a 
simple  robe  of  linen,  as  a  sign  of  humiliation,  and  this, 
after  having  taken  a  bath  in  token  of  purification;  that 
he  must  offer  an  expiatory  sacrifice  for  himself  and  his 
house,  and  another  for  the  people,  sprinkling  some  of 
the  blood  of  each  of  the  victims  before  the  mercy  seat 
in  the  holy  of  holies,  and  putting  their  sins  upon  the 
scapegoat,  that  it  may  bear  them  into  the  desert;  that 
he  must  make  atonement  even  for  the  sanctuary  and  the 
altar,  on  account  of  the  uncleanness  of  the  children  of 
Israel.     This  day  is  therefore  essentially  a  day  of  gen- 
eral and  complete  purification,  on  which  Israel  must  be 
purified  from  all  their  sins  and  all  their  stains. 2     This 
purification,  as  we  have  just  seen,  must  be  effected  by 
humiliation  and  atonement. 

Israel  must  be  pure  and  holy  to  enjoy  the  covenant 
with  Jehovah,  the  pure  and  holy  God.  When  their 
holiness  is  sullied  it  must  be  restored.  For  individ- 
ual stains  and  sins  the  law  prescribes  special  expiatory 
and  purifying  processes.  But  these  processes  do  not 
suffice  to  restore  the  entire  people  to  purity  and  holi- 

1  Lev.  xvi.  29,  31  ;  xxiii.  26-32 ;  Num.  xxix.  7-11. 

2  Lev.  xvi.  16,  19-21,  30,  34. 


306  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

ness.  This  end  is  only  attained  by  the  great  day  of 
atonement.  This  festival,  annually  repeated,  restores 
every  year  the  holiness  of  Israel,  and  thus  renders  pos- 
sible the  maintenance  of  their  covenant  with  the  holy 
God.  That  the  purification  may  be  complete  the  high- 
priest  must  first  purify  himself,  and  then  the  entire 
priesthood,  the  people,  and  even  the  sanctuary  with  the 
altar.  The  people  must  participate  in  the  act  of  puri- 
fication by  observing  a  day  of  rest  and  fasting.  This 
expiatory  festival,  which  was  celebrated  a  few  days 
before  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  the  last  of  the  annual 
festivals,  became  as  it  were  a  day  of  preparation  for  this 
holy  week,  purifying  Israel  from  their  sins  that  they 
might  afterward  give  themselves  to  rejoicing.^ 

7.  The  Feast  of  Purim.  —  According  to  Esther  ix. 
17-32,  the  feast  of  purim  was  instituted  in  the  days 
of  Ahasuerus  by  Mordecai,  in  memory  of  the  defeat 
that  Haman  suffered  in  his  murderous  plans  against 
the  Jews,  and  the  victory  that  the  latter  won  over  their 
enemies.  But  it  is  now  generally  admitted  that  the 
narrative  of  the  book  of  Esther  is  not  historical.  And 
since  we  have  no  other  means  of  discovering  the  actual 
origin  of  this  festival,  it  remains  surrounded  with  great 
obscurit}^  If  there  is  one  thing  clearer  than  another  it 
is  that  this  has  nothing  in  common  with  the  other 
Israelitish  festivals.  It  is  not  brought  into  relation 
with  the  sanctuary,  to  say  nothing  of  God,  whose 
name  even  does  not  once  appear  in  the  book  in 
question. 

1  Bibel-Lexikon,  V.  p.  599  ;  [Ewald,  Antiquities,  p.  361]. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  31.   LEVITISM.  307 

IV.   Religious  Rites, 

We  shall  not  here  speak  again  of  all  the  religious 
ceremonies,  to  which  reference  was  made  in  the  first 
period,  for  the  simple  reason  that  we  have  exhausted 
all  that  concerns  most  of  them.  But  we  must  return 
to  the  subject  of  sacrifices,  on  which  there  remains  a 
number  of  observations  to  be  made. 

We  have  seen  that,  according  to  document  A,  the 
practice  of  making  sacrifices  is  as  old  as  humanity. 
Document  C,  on  the  contrary,  represents  matters  in 
such  a  way  as  to  induce  the  belief  that  Moses  first  insti- 
tuted sacrifices  and  Israelitish  worship  in  general.  In 
the  earlier  history,  in  fact,  it  never  speaks  of  sacrifices, 
and  does  not  allow  us  to  suppose  that  they  were  offered. 
This  is  but  one  instance  of  a  divergence  of  which  a 
more  striking  example  must  here  be  noticed. 

Until  toward  the  Exile  the  important  thing  in  Israel 
was  that  the  sacrifices  be  offered  to  Jehovah,  and  not  to 
other  gods ;  the  ceremony  in  itself  considered,  and  the 
persons  fulfilling  the  sacerdotal  functions  when  sacri- 
fices were  offered,  were  secondary  matters.  Document 
C,  on  the  contrary,  presents  an  entirely  different  view 
of  the  subject.  All  that  concerns  worship  is  there  reg- 
ulated in  the  strictest  and  minutest  manner,  and  all  the 
acts  of  worship  must  be  performed  in  harmony  with 
these  regulations.  The  sons  of  Aaron  alone,  after  hav- 
ing received  the  required  consecration,  have  the  right 
to  offer  sacrifices,  and  to  offer  them  according  to  the 
lawful  ritual.  Any  transgression  of  these  ritualistic 
laws  is  punishable  with  death.  According  to  this  doc- 
ument,   therefore,   it  is   not  to  be  supposed   that   the 


308  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAJVIENT. 

patriarchs,  those  men  of  God,  offered  sacrifices  at  will, 
as  document  A  narrates ;  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that 
faithful  Israelites  or  their  ancestors  performed  relig- 
ious rites  that  were  not  in  strict  conformity  to  the 
regulations  of  the  Mosaic  and  divine  law.  This  is  the 
reason  why  it  does  not  describe  the  patriarchs  as  per- 
forming religious  rites  such  as  sacrifices. 

In  its  legal  portion  this  document  gives  much  space 
to  sacrifices.  Besides  the  numerous  passages  that  reg- 
ulate the  special  ones,  seven  chapters,  Lev.  i. -vii., 
are  exclusively  devoted  to  this  subject.  There  is  men- 
tion of  burnt-offerings,  which  were  entirely  consumed 
on  the  altar,  and  which  therefore  best  express  the  idea 
of  entire  consecration  to  God;i  of  bloodless  sacrifices, 
of  which  only  a  part  was  burned  on  the  altar,  while  the 
rest  fell  to  the  priests  ;2  of  peace-offerings  or  thank- 
offerings,  of  which  certain  portions  were  consumed  on 
the  altar,  while  others  fell  to  the  priests,  or  were  eaten 
by  those  who  offered  them;^  finally,  of  two  kinds  of 
expiatory  sacrifices,  the  blood  from  which  was  used  in 
making  atonement,  and  the  fat  was  burned  on  the  altar, 
while  the  flesh,  in  certain  cases,  was  burned  outside  the 
camp,  and  in  other  cases  was  used  as  food  by  the  priests.* 

Before  the  Exile  only  the  first  three  kinds  of  sacri- 
fices were  known;  at  least  there  is  never  in  the  old 
documents  any  reference  to  a  special  class  of  expiatory 
sacrifices.  Ezekiel  is  the  first  to  make  mention  of 
them.^  There  is  only  one  older  passage  that  speaks, 
not  of  an  expiatory  sacrifice,  but  of  a  guilt-offering,  or  a 

1  i.  ;  vi.  8  ff.  2  ii.  .  vi.  14  ff.  s  iji.  .  yii,  11  ff. 

4iv.  f.;  vi.  24  ff.;  vii.  Iff. 

^  xl.  39  ;  xlii,  13 ;  xliii.  19  ff. ;  xliv.  29 ;  xlv.  15,  17  ff. ;  xlvi.  20, 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  32.  FORGIVENESS,  ATONEMENT.      309 

species  of  fine  that  the  Philistines  believed  themselves 
bound  to  pay  to  the  God  of  Israel,  when  restoring  the 
ark  of  the  covenant,  that  they  might  stop  the  plagues 
that  it  had  brought  upon  them.^  In  another  passage, 
which,  however,  is  perhaps  not  older  than  the  Exile, 
mention  is  also  made  of  guilt  money  and  sin  money, 
which  are  to  fall  to  the  priests,  i.e.  fines  to  be  paid  to 
the  priests,  as  reparation  for  injustice  committed,  and 
which  are  regarded  as  offerings  made  to  Jehovah. 2 
In  Ezekiel,  on  the  contrary,  there  is  reference  to  verita- 
ble sin  and  guilt  offerings,  such  as  we  see  in  document 
C.3  Though  special  names  to  designate  the  expiatory 
sacrifice  are  only  found  from  the  Exile  onward,  and 
they  were  not  made  a  separate  class  until  then,  this  does 
not  mean  that  these  sacrifices  were  not  known  before 
that  time.  The  Israelites,  like  the  other  peoples,  cer- 
tainly from  remote  antiquity  offered  expiatory  sacri- 
fices; but  in  this  case  they  employed  burnt-offerings 
and  thank-offerings.*  Even  in  document  C  are  found 
proofs  that  the  burnt-offering  might  also  serve  as  an 
expiatory  sacrifice.^ 

§  32.    FOKGIVENESS  AND  ATONEMElfT. 

This  is  the  proper  place  to  consider  more  particularly 
the  two  subjects,  forgiveness  and  atonement,  the  latter 
of  which,  especially,  attained  in  this  period  alone  its 
complete  development. 

1  1  Sam.  vi.  3-8.  2  2  Kings  xii.  16  ;  comp.  Num.  v.  5-10. 

3  Lev.  iv.  f.;  vi.  17-vii.  7. 

*  Gen.  viii.  20 ;  Ex.  xx.  24  ;  xxiv.  5  ;  Jud.  xx.  26  ;  xxi.  3  f . ;  1 
Sam.  xiii.  9 ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  18-25 ;  Job  i.  5 ;  xlii.  8;  Mic.  vi.  6  f.  ;  Ezra 
xlv.  15,  17,  5  Lev.  i.  4  ;  xiv.  20 ;  xvi.  24. 


310      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

According  to  the  Old  Testament  there  are  mortal 
sins,  that  can  neither  be  forgiven  nor  expiated, ^  that 
must  be  punished  by  death.  In  the  various  codes  of 
the  Pentateuch  a  large  number  of  passages  pronounce 
the  sentence  of  death  upon  the  guilty. ^  Noav  these 
sentences  should  not  be  regarded  simply  from  the  jurid- 
ical standpoint;  it  is  Jehovah  who  pronounces  them, 
or  who  causes  them  to  be  pronounced  and  executed, 
that  he  may  extirpate  from  the  midst  of  his  people  and 
exclude  from  his  covenant  those  who  have  become  guilty 
of  unpardonable  sins.  According  to  Num.  xv.  27-31, 
involuntary  sins  may  be  expiated  and  pardoned,  but 
sins  committed  with  a  high  hand,  i.e.  intentionally, 
deliberately,  defiantly,  and  contemptuously,^  do  not 
obtain  forgiveness;  they  must  be  punished  by  death. 
This  distinction,  however,  is  found  only  in  document 
C;^  elsewhere,  on  the  contrary,  we  see  that  forgiveness 
is  granted  even  to  sins  committed  in  a  perfectly  con- 
scious condition. 

Often,  in  fact,  the  people  Israel  were  unworthy  of 
forgiveness.  Jehovah  forgave  them  then  for  'lis  own 
sake,  and  for  the  sake  of  his  name,  to  sanctify,  glorify 
his  name  among  the  heathen  nations,  that  it  might  not 
be  exposed  to  their  scoffs,  and  allowed  to  be  profaned ;  ^ 

1  Ex.  xxxii.  30-35 ;  1  Sam.  iii.  14. 

2  Gen.  xvii.  14  ;  Ex.  xii.  15,  19  ;  xxxi.  14  f. ;  xxxv.  2  ;  Lev.  vii. 
20  ff. ;  xvii.  4  ;  xxiii.  29  ;  etc. 

3  Comp.  Num.  xxxiii.  3  ;  Ex.  xiv.  8. 

*  Lev.  iv.  2  ff.,  13  ff.,  22  ff.,  27  ff. ;  v.  15  ff.  ;  xxii.  14  ;  Num.  xv. 
22  ff. ;  xxxv.  11,  15,  22  ff.  ;  Josh.  xx.  3  ff.,  9. 

5  Num.  xiv.  13  ff.  ;  Deut.  ix.  24  ff.  ;  Jer.  xiv.  20  f. ;  Ezek.  xx.  8  f., 
13  f.,  21  f.,  43  f. ;  xxxvi.  17  ff.,  22  ff.  j  Isa.  xUii,  25 ;  xlviii,  9-11  ;  Ps, 
Ixxix.  9  f . 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  32.  FORGIVENESS,  ATONEMENT.      311 

or  perhaps  for  the  sake  of  Zion  and  Jerusalem,  chosen 
by  Jehovah  as  a  place  for  his  name ;  ^  or  again  perhaps 
on  account  of  the  fathers,  of  the  covenant  made  with 
them,  and  the  promises  made  to  them  under  oath;^ 
finally,  on  account  of  the  intercession  or  the  faithful- 
ness of  genuine  servants  of  God.^  All  this  amounts 
to  saying  that  Jehovah  grants  to  his  people  unmerited 
forgiveness,  gratuitous  forgiveness. 

From  ancient  times  forgiveness  is  placed  in  close 
relation  with  atonement.  But  this  latter,  in  Judaism, 
is  understood  otherwise  than  in  Hebraism,  and  the 
terms  used  to  denote  it  in  the  Old  Testament  have  a 
signification  different  from  that  which  we  attach  to  the 
word  atone. 

The  Hebrew  terms  that  are  generally  rendered  by 
this  English  word  or  its  derivatives  come  from  the  root 
haphar^  which  means  cover.  Thus,  according  to  Gen. 
xxxii.  20,  Jacob  seeks  to  cover  the  face  of  Esau  with 
presents,  that  the  latter  may  not  see  his  fault,  and  that 
he  himself  may  look  his  brother  in  the  face  without 
further  fear  of  his  anger.  When  the  people  Israel  have 
offended  Jehovah  by  the  worship  of  the  golden  calf, 
Moses  seeks  to  cover  the  sin  of  the  people  by  entreating 
the  forgiveness  of  God.*  According  to  Deut.  xxxii.  43, 
Jehovah  covers  his  country  and  his  people  by  aveng- 
ing the  blood  of  his  servants,  and  avenging  himself  on 


1  1  Kings  xi.  13,  32,  36  ;  xiv.  21. 

2  Ex.  xxxii.  13  f . ;  Lev.  xxvi.  40-45  ;  Deut.  ix.  27  ;  1  Kings  xi.  13, 
32,  34,  36  ;  xv.  3-5 ;  2  Kings  viii.  18  f.  ;  xiii.  23  ;  xix.  34  ;  xx.  6. 

3  Gen.  xviii.  26  ff.  ;  xx.  7;  Ex.  xxxii.  11-14;  Num.  xiv.  13-20; 
Deut.  ix.  25  ff. ;  1  Sam.  vii.  5  ;  Job  xlii.  8  f. ;  Ps.  cvi.  23  ;  Jer.  v.  1 ; 
Ezek.  xxii.  30  :  Isa.  liii.  ;  Ixv.  8.  *  Ex.  xxxii.  30. 


312      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

his  adversaries.^  Gocl  declares  on  his  oath  that  the 
sin  of  Eli  shall  never  be  covered  by  sacrifices. ^  The 
term  in  question  also  designates  the  reparation  that 
David  makes  to  the  Gibeonites,  for  the  injury  done 
them  by  Saul.^  This  reparation  is  at  the  same  time  a 
satisfaction  rendered  to  Jehovah,  who  has  sent  upon 
his  people  famine  in  punishment  of  this  crime.  It 
consists  in  delivering  to  the  Gibeonites  seven  sons  of 
Saul,  that  they  may  be  hanged  before  Jehovah  at 
Gibeah.^  When  Isaiah,  at  the  time  of  his  call,  thinks 
himself  undone,  because  he,  though  unclean,  has  seen 
Jehovah,  a  seraph  touches  his  lip  with  a  glowing  stone 
taken  from  the  altar  of  the  sanctuary,  and  says  to  him : 
"Thy  iniquity  is  taken  away,  and  thy  sin  is  covered."^ 
Thenceforward  the  prophet  has  nothing  to  fear  from 
the  holy  presence  of  God.  In  another  series  of  pas- 
sages, it  is  generally  God  who  covers  the  sin  of  men, 
clearly  as  not  taking  account  of  it,  as  forgiving  it.^  In 
Prov.  xvi.  6  man  is  regarded  as  himself  covering  sin 
by  virtue,  as  for  example,  a  little  farther  on  in  verse 
14,  the  wise  man  is  said  to  cover  the  wrath  of  the  king, 
i.e.  appease  it.  The  verb  kasah,  which  evidently  means 
cover^  is  used  in  the  same  sense  as  kapliar^  but  more 
rarely." 

In  the  foregoing  it  is  difficult  to  find  a  distinct  theory 
on  the  subject  under  discussion.  What  appears  most 
clearly  is  that  sin  needs  to  be  covered  before  the  holy 

1  Riehm,  Studien  u.  Kritiken,  1877,  p.  24;  [Schultz,  I.  pp.  397  f.]. 

2  1  Sam.  iii.  14.  s  2  Sam.  xxi.  3. 
4  2  Sam.  xxi.  1-6.  s  jga.  vi.  5-7. 

6  Deut.  xxi.  8;  Jer.  xviii.  23;  Ezek.  xvi.  63;  2  Chron.  xxx.  18; 
Ps.  Ixv.  3  ;  Ixxviii.  38  ;  Ixxix.  9  ;  comp.  Isa.  xxii.  14  ;  xxvii.  9 ;  Dan. 
ix.  24.  "  Prov.  x.  12  ;  xvii.  9  ;  Neh.  iv.  5 ;  Ps.  xxxii.  1  ;  Ixxxv.  2. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  32.  F0RG1VE:NESS,  ATONEMENT.       313 

God,  that  God  usually  covers  it  himself,  and  that  the 
intercession  of  a  man  of  God,  the  offering  of  sacrifices, 
repentance,  and  faithfulness,  are  the  means  of  coveiing 
it.  With  the  appearance  of  the  two  Levitical  theorists, 
Ezekiel  and  the  author  of  document  C,  the  subject  is 
presented  in  a  more  uniform  manner,  and  otherwise  than 
in  the  early  documents.  According  to  them,  in  fact, 
it  is  persons,  unclean  or  unholy  souls,  not  sin,  that 
need  to  be  covered;  it  is  not  God  that  covers  them,  but 
the  priesthood ;  and  the  means  used  are  the  sacred  rites, 
chiefly  sacrifices,  and  especially  sin  and  guilt  offerings.^ 
There  is  even  reference  to  the  covering  of  things,  espe- 
cially sacred  objects,  to  make  them  clean,  holy ;  ^  thus 
the  land  that  has  been  polluted  by  the  blood  of  a  per- 
son intentionally  slain  can  be  covered  only  by  the 
blood  of  the  murderer.  ^ 

All  this  proves  that  the  word  atone^  by  which  the 
verb  kaphar  is  usually  rendered,  distorts  the  primitive 
and  characteristic  idea  that  it  is  intended  to  express. 
This  is  best  shown  by  the  fact  that  document  C,  which 
gave  to  this  idea  the  importance  that  was  afterwards 
attributed  to  it,  like  Ezekiel,  speaks  of  objects  that 
must  be  covered.  The  translators  are  therefore  obliged, 
in  conformity  with  established  usage,  to  speak  of  an 
altar,  a  sanctuary,  etc.,  for  which  atonement  must  be 

1  Ezek.  xlv.  15,  17 ;  Ex.  xxix.  33,  36  ;  xxx.  10-16  ;  Lev.  i.  4 ;  iv. 
20  ff.  ;  V.  6  ff. ;  vi.  30  ;  vii.  7  ;  viii.  34  ;  ix.  7  f .  ;  x.  17  ;  xii.  7  f.  ;  xiv. 
18-21,  29-31,  52  f. ;  xv.  15,  30 ;  xvi.  6  ff.  ;  xvii.  11 ;  xix.  22  ;  xxiii. 
27  f.  ;  Num.  v.  8  ;  vi.  11  ;  viii.  12  ff. ;  xv.  25,  28 ;  xvi.  46  f.  ;  xxv.  13 ; 
xxviii.  22,  30  ;  xxix.  5,  11  ;  xxxi.  50  ;  1  Chron.  vi.  49 ;  2  Chron.  xxix. 
24  ;  xxx.  18. 

2  Ezek.  xliii.  20,  26  ;  xlv.  18-20  ;  Ex.  xxix.  36  f.  ;  xxx.  10  ;  Lev. 
viii.  15  ;  xiv.  53  ;  xvi.  16,  18,  20,  33.  »  Num.  xxxv.  33. 


314  THEOLOGY    OF    THK   OLD    TESTAMENT. 

made,  that  it  may  be  or  remain  consecrated  to  Jehovah. 
This  is  a  false  idea,,  and  one  that  the  Old  Testament 
does  not  intend  to  express.  What  it  means  is  that  men 
and  things,  in  a  sinfnl  or  unclean  condition,  or  in  a 
profane  condition,  need  to  be  clothed  in  moral  or  Levit- 
ical  holiness  to  exist  in  the  presence  of  the  God  of 
holiness,  to  be  pleasing  to  him,  or  consecrated  to  his 
service. 

Though  the  Old  Testament  speaks  of  various  means 
of  atonement,  though  it  represents  certain  sacrifices  as 
means  of  expiation  par  excellence^  as  means  of  covering 
the  sins  of  men  before  the  holy  God,  it  does  not  explain 
just  how  atonement  is  effected.  Too  often,  in  seeking 
a  solution  of  this  question,  almost  exclusive  atten- 
tion has  been  paid  to  Lev.  xvii.  11,  and  it  has  been 
concluded  that  there  can  be  no  atonement  and  forgive- 
ness without  the  shedding  of  blood.  ^  But  the  passage 
is  not  so  absolute.  It  says,  indeed,  that  blood  serves 
the  purpose  of  atonement;  it  does  not  say  that  it  alone 
serves  this  purpose.  And  even  if  it  did  say  so,  we 
should  here  have  only  the  view  of  document  C,  and  not 
that  of  the  Old  Testament  in  general;  for  we  have 
become  acquainted  with  other  means  of  expiation. 
But  this  document  itself  recognizes  that  the  shedding 
of  blood  is  not  indispensable  to  atonement.  It  speaks 
of  bloodless  atoning  sacrifices.^  It  shows  that  the 
offering  of  incense  also  effects  atonement,'^  as  well  as 
the  offering  of  money  brought  by  each  Israelite  Avhen 
the  people  are  numbered.*  Finally  in  atoning  sacri- 
fices all  parts  of  the  victims  and  all  the  sacrificial  acts 

1  Heb.  ix.  22.  2  Lev.  v.  11-1.3. 

3  Num.  xvi.  46  f.  *  Ex.  xxx.  11-16. 


THIRD  PERIOD.— §  32.  FORGIVENESS,  ATONEMENT.      315 

contribute  to  atonement,  for  only  after  the  performance 
of  all  these  acts  is  it  usually  said  that  the  priest  shall 
thus  make  atonement  for  the  guilty,  and  that  they  shall 
be  forgiven.  1  The  blood  of  the  atoning  victims  should 
not,  therefore,  be  regarded  as  the  principal  means  of 
atonement.  According  to  Lev.  xvii.  11,  it  has  this 
effect,  because  the  blood  is  the  seat  of  the  soul  or  the 
life  of  the  victim ;  this  is  the  reason  why  it  can  make 
atonement  for  souls.  But  whence  comes  it  that  the 
blood  is  the  seat  of  life,  has  this  effect?  The  Scrip- 
tures do  not  say.  We  think  that  it  is  because,  in  the 
Old  Testament,  life  is  always  regarded  as  the  most 
precious  and  the  most  sacred  of  things. ^  The  special 
part  played  by  the  blood  in  the  offering  of  expiatory 
sacrifices  is  indicated  by  the  peculiar  way  in  which  it 
is  sprinkled.^ 

It  has  often  been  taught  that  the  atoning  victim  was 
slain  in  the  place  of  the  sinner,  that  it  suffered  the 
death  that  the  latter  had  deserved.  But  this  is  not  so. 
According  to  the  Israelitish  law,  the  man  who  has  de- 
served death  is  obliged  to  suffer  it,  he  cannot  redeem 
himself  by  any  victim  whatsoever.  Expiatory  sacrifices 
can  only  cover  sins  committed  by  inadvertence,  which 
do  not  incur  the  penalty  of  death.  Nor  does  anything 
in  the  ceremony  connected  with  expiatory  sacrifices 
indicate  that  the  victims  suffer  death  in  place  of  the 
guilty.  The  atoning  victims  are  slain  like  the  others. 
Their  slaughter  is  simply  the  means  of  obtaining  the 
blood,  the  fat,  and  the  flesh,  each  of  which  contributes 
to  the  sacrificial  act.     It  is  equally  wrong  to  suppose 

1  Lev.  iv.  20,  26,  35  ;  v.  10,  13.  2  [Schultz,  I.  pp.  385  f.] 

3  Lev.  iv.  6  f.,  16-18,  25  ;  comp.  i.  5  ;  iii.  2. 


316  THEOLOGY   OF    THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

that  in  placing  his  hand  upon  the  head  of  the  victim 
the  offender  transfers  his  guilt  to  it.  This  act  is  pre- 
scribed for  sacrifices  in  general,  as,  for  example,  for 
peace-offerings,  1  by  Avhich  thanks  are  rendered  to  God.^ 
Since  the  atoning  sacrifice,  like  any  other  sacrifice, 
is  a  qorhan^  an  offering,^  we  must  come  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  it  is  an  offering  made  to  God  by  an  offender, 
to  make  amends  for  a  reparable  transgression,  and  to 
obtain  forgiveness  for  it.  It  is  in  reality  a  means  of 
grace,  a  means  offered  by  Jehovah  to  members  of  his 
people  who  have  inadvertently  sinned  against  him,  by 
which  they  may  be  restored  to  favor  before  him,  be 
reconciled  to  him,  and  thus  continue  to  enjoy  the 
covenant  with  him. 


§  33.    ETHICAL  LIFE. 
I.   Pharisaism. 

Since  worship,  the  external  side  of  religion,  played  a 
preponderant  part  in  Judaism,  the  internal,  the  moral 
and  religious,  life  necessarily  had  to  suffer.  An  exag- 
gerated value  attributed  to  external  worship,  in  fact, 
leads  man  to  believe  that  the  strict  performance  of 
religious  ceremonies  constitutes  the  prime  duty  of  life, 
that  this  is  the  sum  total  of  religion,  and  even  moralit}^ 
The  Jews  were  the  more  liable  to  fall  into  this  error, 
since,  for  them,  as  for  the  Hebrews,  morality  was 
essentially  religious,  inseparable  from  religion.  In 
strict  devotion  to  the  latter  they  believed  that  they 
faithfully  fulfilled  all  their  duties. 

1  Lev.  iii.  2  Lev.  vii.  11  ff.  3  Lev.  iv.  23,  28,  32  ;  v.  11. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  33.    ETHICAL   LIFE.  317 

When  religion  is  purely  legal  and  formalistic,  as  was 
that  of  the  Jews,  it  is,  moreover,  easier  to  meet  its 
demands  than  when  it  consists  of  holiness  of  heart  and 
life.  In  the  latter  case  there  is  always  something  lack- 
ing even  in  the  best.  Legality  is  easier  of  attainment 
than  genuine  piety  and  morality.  Formalism  and 
legalism,  therefore,  necessarily  issue  in  pride.  They 
engender  the  doctrine  of  the  merit  of  works,  of  salvation 
by  one's  own  righteousness.  They  produce  contempt 
for  all  who  do  not  observe,  or  do  not  strictly  enough 
observe,  the  elaborate  and  often  wearisome  rites  of 
religion. 

All  this  we  learn  from  Pharisaism,  as  it  presents 
itself  to  us  in  the  New  Testament,  whence  we  see  that 
it  was  not  merely  a  sect  or  a  tendency  in  the  midst  of 
Judaism,  but  the  dominant  tendency,  so  that  Judaism 
and  Pharisaism  finally  became  identical.  But  the 
Pharisaical  tendency  existed  among  the  Jews  before 
the  rise  of  the  Pharisaical  party.  We  shall  describe 
some  of  its  characteristic  features. 

It  should  first  of  all  be  observed  that  the  old  cove- 
nant, with  its  essentially  legal  regime^  develops  in  man 
the  idea  of  his  own  righteousness,  and  largely  issues  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  merit  of  works.  The  whole  Old 
Testament  teaches  that  the  salvation  of  each  one  de- 
pends upon  his  righteousness,  upon  the  faithful  observ- 
ance of  the  commands  of  God,  formulated  by  the  written 
law  or  the  prophets.  Thus  when  Schultz  declares  that 
there  is  no  self-righteousness  in  Israel,  that  there  is 
only  a  righteousness  given  by  God  and  springing  from 
free  grace,  he  does  not  state  the  matter  correctly,  but 
confounds  the  view  of  the  Old  Testament  with  that  of 


318  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

the  New.i  It  is  true  that  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  with 
his  people  is  represented  as  a  pure  favor  on  the  part  of 
God.  But  when  this  grace  is  once  granted  by  God  and 
accepted  by  the  people,  God  is  bound  by  his  righteous- 
ness and  his  faithfulness  to  grant  his  blessings  to  his 
people,  as  they  are  bound  to  be  righteous  and  faithful, 
that  they  may  not  be  punished  or  rejected  by  God. 
And  what  is  true  of  the  entire  people  is  true  also  of 
each  individual  Israelite.  He  who  does  not  strictly 
observe  the  commands  of  God  cannot  share  in  his  cov- 
enant and  his  blessings.  It  is  impossible  to  cite  here 
all  the  passages  that  contain  such  a  declaration,  but 
this  is  not  necessary  for  one  who  is  acquainted  with 
the  Old  Te'stament;  it  will  suffice  to  refer  to  Deuter- 
onomy and  the  book  of  Job,  the  worthiest  productions  of 
the  early  religion  of  Israel.  The  former  of  these  books 
expresses  the  view  dominant  in  the  Old  Testament  in 
these  words :  "  Jehovah  hath  commanded  us  to  put  into 
practice  all  these  laws,  and  to  fear  Jehovah,  our  God, 
that  we  may  always  be  happy,  and  that  he  may  preserve 
us  alive.  "^  This  view  is  also  maintained  against  Job 
by  his  friends,  when  they  say  to  him:  "Doth  not  thy 
fear  of  God  sustain  thee  ?  Is  not  thy  hope,  thy  integ- 
rity ?  "  2  The  tragical  character  of  the  book  of  Job  arises 
from  the  fact  that  the  traditional  religion  of  Israel 
demands  that  the  hero  of  the  book  be  perfectly  happy, 
because  of  his  integrity  and  his  uprightness,  while,  in 
reality,  he  is  very  unhappy.  That  hapjDiness  bears  an 
exact  ratio  to  faithfulness,  was  a  fundamental  principle 
in  the  Israelitish  religion,  and  when  facts  happened  to 
belie  it,  the  believer,  as  the  book  of  Job  shows,  was 
1  n.  30  f.  2  Deut.  vi.  24  ;  comp.  xxx.  15  ff.  ^  job  iv.  6. 


THirvD    PERIOD.  —  §  33.    ETHICAL   LIFE.  319 

thrown  into  great  embarrassment.  Take,  again,  the 
prayer  of  the  sick  Hezekiah  asking  God  to  cure  him: 
*' Jehovah!  remember  that  I  have  walked  before  thy 
face  in  faithfuhiess  and  integrity  of  heart,  and  that  I 
have  done  Avhat  is  good  in  thy  eyes !  "  ^  Here  is  an 
expression  of  the  feeling  that  must  have  filled  the  heart 
of  every  Israelite  who  was,  or  believed  himself,  faith- 
ful, and  that,  in  fact,  often  recurs  in  the  Psalms,  a 
considerable  number  of  which  date  from  the  period 
before  the  Exile. ^ 

Though  the  idea  of  the  merit  of  works  is  inseparable 
from  the  essence  of  the  religion  of  Israel,  this  idea  was 
nevertheless  destined  to  gain  much  in  intensity  in  the 
midst  of  Judaism,  when  the  voice  of  the  prophets  had 
died  away,  and  the  letter  of  the  law,  especially  of  the 
ceremonial  law,  had  become  the  basis  of  religion. 
External  practices  always  played  an  important  part  in 
the  religion  of  Israel,  which  was  far  from  comprehend- 
ing that  God  is  a  spirit,  and  that  he  must  be  worshipped 
in  spirit  and  in  truth.  But  the  prophets  vigorously 
opposed  the  external  and  superficial  piety  of  the  multi- 
tude, and  sought  to  awaken  in  the  heart  a  more  vital 
piety.  After  the  Exile,  on  the  contrary,  prophetism 
disappeared,  and  external  worship,  developed  under  the 
influence  of  a  marked  predilection  for  it,  obtained  legal 
sanction  in  document  C.  Thenceforward  formalism 
and  legalism,  so  agreeable  to  the  natural  tendencies  of 
the  human  heart,  which  seeks  an  easy  and  comfortable 
religion,  got  the  upper  hand  and  with  it  the  claim  to 
self- righteousness. 

1  2  Kings  XX.  3. 

2  Ps.  vii.  8  ;  xvii.  1  ff. ;  xviii.  20,  24  ;  xxvi.  ;  xxxv.  23  f.  ;  xli.  12  ; 
xliv.  17  ff. ;  etc. 


320  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

The  example  of  Nehemiah,  one  of  the  fathers  of  Juda- 
ism, is  a  striking  proof  of  this.  The  principal  object 
of  his  efforts  was  to  lead  the  ^^eople  to  submit  to  the 
ceremonial  law.  Now  he  imagined  that  he  thus  ac- 
quired the  greatest  merit.  He  is  constantly  saying: 
"  Remember  me  in  favor,  O  my  God,  on  account  of  all 
that  I  have  done  for  this  people !  Forget  not  my  pious 
deeds !  "  ^  Daniel,  likewise,  says  to  King  Nebuchadnez- 
zar: "Cancel  thy  sins  by  kindnesses  and  thy  iniquities 
by  compassion  toward  the  unfortunate,  and  thy  happi- 
ness may  be  prolonged.  "^  Finally,  the  book  of  Tobit 
frequently  and  naively  expresses  the  idea  of  the  merit 
of  works,  especially  alms  and  other  acts  of  charity  done 
to  the  brethren. 3  It  goes  so  far  as  to  declare  that  alms 
deliver  from  death  and  cleanse  from  all  sin,  and  that 
those  who  give  alms  will  be  blessed  with  long  life.* 

II.    Exclusivism. 

Another  characteristic  feature  of  the  religion  of  Israel, 
which  we  encounter  from  early  times,  and  which  takes 
exaggerated  proportions  in  Judaism,  is  a  hostile  atti- 
tude toward  strangers.  The  fundamental  idea  of  this 
religion,  that  God  has  chosen  Israel  from  among  all  the 
peoples  of  the  earth  to  make  them  a  peculiar  people, 
must  naturally  give  birth  to  national  pride,  though,  in 
theory,  it  was  admitted  that  this  covenant  was  purely  a 
divine  favor.  By  virtue  of  their  election,  Israel  believed 
themselves  possessed  of  peculiar  privileges  and  rights 

1  Neh.  V.  19  ;  xiii.  14,  22,  31.  2  jy.  27. 

3  i.  2  f.,  16  ff. ;  ii.  2  ff.,  14  ;  iv.  7  ff.,  16 ;  xii.  8  f.  ;  xiv.  2,  7  ff- 

*  xu,  9, 


THIRD    PERIOD.  —  §  33.    ETHICAL   LIFE.  321 

over  all  the  other  peoples.  Hence  the  thought  that  they 
could  exterminate  without  scruple  the  inhabitants  of 
the  land  of  Canaan,  and  that  they  must  make  alliance 
Avith  no  foreign  people.  This  view  is  expressed  not 
only  in  the  early  documents,  but  even  in  Deuteronomy . i 
In  the  prophetical  period  this  exclusive  tendency  was 
modified  by  a  higher  view.  The  prophets  express  the 
hope  of  a  universal  salvation.  In  Deuteronomy  we 
frequently  find  the  injunction  to  deal  kindly  with  the 
strangers  who  live  in  the  midst  of  Israel.  This  breadth, 
the  product  of  the  prophetical  spirit,  could  not  be  de- 
veloped in  the  midst  of  Judaism;  it  was  stifled,  like  so 
many  other  excellent  elements  of  prophetism,  until 
the  time  when  the  gospel  revivified  these  germs  of  truth 
and  life,  and  allowed  them  to  be  even  more  grandly 
developed. 

The  tendency  of  which  we  have  just  spoken  mani- 
fested itself  from  the  return  of  the  exiles  onward. 
The  Samaritans,  since  they  worshipped  the  same  God 
as  the  Jews,  desired  to  take  part  in  the  restoration  of 
the  temple.  This  offer  of  fraternal  cooperation,  instead 
of  being  favorably  accepted,  was  repelled,  and  the 
Samaritans  were  informed  that  they  had  neither  part 
nor  right  nor  memorial  in  Jerusalem. ^  It  is  well 
known  that  this  was  the  beginning  of  a  hateful  rivalry 
that  lasted  for  centuries.  Exaggeration  of  the  national 
sentiment  and  the  national  purity  was  also  the  chief 
cause  of  the  pitiless  dismissal  of  all  foreign  wives, 
required  by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.^  Complete  separation 
from  strangers  appears  to  have  been  an  essential  feature 

1  Chap.  vii.  2  Ezra  iv.  2  f .  ;  Neb.  ii.  20. 

3Ezraix.  1;  Neh.  xiii.  23  ff. 


822      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

of  Jewish  fidelity.  1  What  a  difference  between  this 
view  and  that  betrayed  by  the  book  of  Ruth,  in  which 
conjugal  union  between  Israelites  and  Moabites  appears 
so  harmless  that  the  author  undertakes  to  show  that  one 
of  the  ancestors  of  David  was  the  Moabitess,  Ruth ! 

The  national  pride  of  the  Jews  finds  expression  in 
the  book  of  Daniel.  Canaan  is  called  the  most  beauti- 
ful of  all  countries ;  ^  the  Jews  receive  the  extravagant 
title  of  saints  of  the  Most-High,^  and  appear  as  the 
favorites  of  God ;  *  finall}^  even  the  glorification  of 
their  God  by  the  mouths  of  the  gentiles  is  to  serve 
to  enhance  the  glory  of  the  Jews.^  This  tendency 
reaches  its  culmination  in  the  book  of  Esther.  With 
boundless  national  pride  is  here  associated  a  profound 
hatred  of  enemies,  and  an  extreme  pleasure  in  the  ven- 
geance taken  upon  them;  the  whole  is  crowned  by  a 
feast  destined  to  perpetuate  the  memory  of  the  massa- 
cre of  their  enemies.  The  same  spirit  recurs  in  the 
book  of  Judith.  It,  in  fact,  confesses  that  all  means 
are  allowable  by  which  the  Jews  can  destroy  their 
enemies,  and  that  God  will  grant  success  even  to  per- 
fidious and  criminal  enterprises  undertaken  with  this 
object;^  it  also  expresses  the  conviction  that  God,  on 
the  day  of  judgment,  will  execute  vengeance  upon  all 
the  enemies  of  the  Jews,  sending  fire  and  worms  upon 
their  bodies  to  torment  them  forever."  Sirach  himself 
approves    hatred  of   enemies  and  vengeance  taken  on 

1  Neh.  ix.  2  ;  x.  28,  30  ;  xiii.  30.  2  yiii.  9 ;  xi.  16,  41. 

3  vii.  18,  21  f.,  25,  27  ;  viii.  24  ;  xii.  7. 

*  i.  17  ft.;  ii.  25  ff.,  46  ff.;  iii.  30  ;  iv.  8  f.,  18  ;  v.  11,  14,  29 ;  vi.  28. 

s  ii.  47  ;  iii.  26,  28  f .  ;  iv,  1-3,  34-37  ;  vi.  20,  25-27. 

6  Chaps,  viii.  ff.  ''  xvi.  17. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  33.    ETHICAL   LIFE.  323 

them.i  A  considerable  number  of  psalms  contain  un- 
disguised expressions  of  the  same  sentiments,  for 
example  this  praj^er  to  God:  "Shed  thy  fur}^  upon  the 
nations  that  know  not  thee,  and  upon  the  kingdoms  that 
call  not  upon  thy  name."^  These  are  sentiments 
entirely  opposed  to  those  of  most  of  the  prophets,  who 
wished  and  hoped  that  Jehovah  would  make  his  name 
known  to  all  nations.  Elsewhere  a  psalmist  cries: 
"Daughter  of  Babylon,  the  wasted,  happy  he  who 
repayeth  thee  in  kind  the  evil  that  thou  hast  done  us ! 
Happy  he  who  seizeth  thy  children,  and  dasheth  them 
upon  the  rock!  "^  Other  psalms  give  utterance  to  the 
same  spirit  of  hatred  and  vengeance  against  enemies, 
against  strangers.* 

III.   Scepticism, 

The  formalism  and  the  narrowness  that  we  have 
found  to  have  existed  in  the  midst  of  Judaism  prove 
conclusively  that  the  religious  and  moral  life  was 
growing  feeble.  Another  not  less  evident  proof  of  the 
same  fact  is  the  scepticism  that  shows  itself  in  the  book 
of  Ecclesiastes.  Scepticism  is  very  often  a  fruit  of 
superficial  formalism  and  haughty  narrowness.  When 
these  two  lamentable  tendencies  become  dominant  in  a 
people,  reflecting  persons,  who  have  no  real  piety,  easily 
allow  themselves  to  fall  into  scepticism,  the  distress- 
ing conviction  so  often  repeated  in  Ecclesiastes :  "  All 
is  vanity! " 

1  Chap.  xii.  ;  xxv.  7  ;  xxx.  6  ;  xxxiii.  7  ff. 

2  Ps.  Ixxix.  6  ;  comp.  Jer.  x.  25.  ^  pg.  cxxxvii.  8  f. 

4  xviii.  37  ff. ;  xli.  10 ;  Iv.  15 ;  Iviii.  10 ;  Ixix.  22  ff.;  cix.  6  ff. 


324      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

The  problem  of  life  that  confronts  one  in  the  book  of 
Job  is  equally  prominent  in  Ecclesiastes.  But  while, 
in  the  former  book,  faith  triumphs  over  doubt,  without, 
however,  solving  the  problem  stated,  in  the  second,  it 
is  doubt  that  seems  to  prevail  over  faith.  The  proposi- 
tion that  constantly  recurs  in  Ecclesiastes  is  that  all  is 
vanity:  toils,  pleasures,  wisdom,  wealth,  power, ^  the 
practice  of  righteousness, ^  even  existence  itself.^  This 
scepticism  is,  however,  not  absolute.  Not  to  speak  of 
the  close  of  the  book,*  of  which  the  authenticity  is  not 
admitted  by  everybody,  we  hnd  in  it,  in  several  pas- 
sages, the  expression  not  only  of  faith,  but  of  confidence 
in  God,^  and  the  injunction  to  fear  God,^  on  account  of 
the  judgment  which  no  one  Avill  escape.''  The  last  two 
verses  of  the  book,^  so  far  from  being  a  heterogeneous 
addition,  is,  therefore,  in  complete  accord  with  the 
rest  of  it. 

This  faith  in  God,  in  virtue  and  retribution,  which 
our  author  seeks  to  retain,  in  spite  of  all  the  objections 
of  reason,  prevents  him  from  falling  into  the  abyss  of 
impiety  or  despair.  But  this  faith  is  not  powerful 
enough  to  become  truly  triumphant.  It  is  in  conflict 
with  the  objections  of  reason  from  one  end  of  the  book 
to  the  other.  Though  the  author  maintains  his  faith 
to  the  end,  the  objections  also  retain  to  the  end  all  their 
force.  In  Job  we  find,  as  a  conclusion,  believing  res- 
ignation to  the  sovereign  will  of  God;  in  Ecclesiastes 
there  is  hardly  anything  but  submission  to  fate. 

1  i.  2,  17  f.  ;  ii.  1,  11,  15,  19,  23,  25  f.;  iii.  19 ;  iv.  4,  7  f.,  16  ;  v.  10 ; 
vi.  9  ;  vii.  6  ;  xii.  10.  2  yii.  15  f . ;  viii.  10,  14  ;  ix.  1-3. 

3  ii.  17  ;  iv.  2  f.;  vii.  1.  *  xii.  11-16. 

5  iii.  10  f.,  14,  17  ;  v.  18  ff. ;  vii.  13  f.,  29. 
^  V.  7/  vii.  18  ;  viii.  12  f. ;  xii.  3.  "  xii.  1.  ^  xii.  15  f. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  33.    ETHICAL   LIFE.  325 

This  book,  even  more  clearly  than  that  of  Job,  shows 
the  insufficiency  of  the  religious  principles  of  the  Old 
Testament,  the  impossibility  of  solving  with  their  aid 
the  problem  of  life  satisfactorily.  It  lays  one's  finger 
on  the  source  of  this  insufficiency,  viz.  the  want  of 
hope,  hope  in  the  life  everlasting.  ^  Reuss  justly  says 
of  this  book:  "It  is  the  last  attempt  made  by  Hebrew 
philosophy  to  conjure  doubts  henceforth  irresistible,  to 
solve  the  problem  of  life  without  leaving  the  narrow 
circle  of  ancient  beliefs.  And  this  attempt,  so  far 
from  succeeding,  issues  in  the  confession,  as  sad  as  it  is 
sincere,  of  its  own  vanity,  nay  we  should  rather  say, 
in  complete  bankruptcy  of  reason.  "^ 

IV.    Wisdom, 

Pharisaism,  exclusivism,  scepticism,  —  do  these  three 
words  express  the  entire  moral  and  religious  life  of 
the  Jews?  By  no  means;  they  characterize  only  one 
side  of  it.  Formalism  and  exclusivism  are  in  a  man- 
ner the  legal  and  official  tendency  of  Judaism.  But 
just  as  these  defects  are  only  the  exaggeration  of  cer- 
tain inferior  principles  of  the  ancient  religion  of  Israel, 
so  the  higher  side  of  this  religfion  continued  to  exercise 
a  happy  and  powerful  influence  in  the  midst  of  Judaism, 
and  produced  some  new  fruits. 

The  book  of  Jonah,  for  example,  gives  utterance  to 
a  breadth  of  sentiment  toward  the  gentiles  that  we  find 
nowhere  else  in  the  Old  Testament.     Not  only  is  Jonah 

Mii.  18-22;  vi.  11  f .  ;  ix.  4  f.,  11. 

2  Philosophie  des  Hehreux,  p.  288  ;  [Driver,  Introduction  to  the  Lit- 
erature of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  443]. 


326  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAJVIENT. 

commissioned  by  God  to  preach  repentance  to  Nineveh, 
a  city  hostile  to  Israel,  at  which  so  many  prophets  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah  hurled  the  most  violent  threats ;  but 
God  forgives  this  city,  because  it  shows  itself  repent- 
ant. While  the  Jews  generally  hated  and  despised  the 
gentiles,  here  is  a  book,  which,  like  deutero-Isaiah  and 
the  Gospel,  teaches  them  that  they  must  be  the  light  of 
the  nations,  to  lead  them  to  salvation.  To  our  period 
belong  also  a  large  number  of  psalms  that  breathe  a  pro- 
found faith,  a  piety  just  as  vital  as  that  which  we  find 
in  the  prophetical  literature.  A  portion  of  the  Prov- 
erbs, and  especially  the  first  nine  chapters,  also  belong 
to  our  period.  What  a  profound  attachment  to  virtue 
finds  expression  in  them!  In  the  book  of  Sirach  and 
in  that  of  Baruch  there  are  also  fine  pages,  betraying 
the  same  faith,  the  same  religious  and  moral  life,  as  the 
best  canonical  books.  It  is  the  same  with  Wisdom, 
though  tliis  book  has  a  strong  philosophical  tinge.  We 
shall  not  go  into  details  to  prove  all  this  because  it 
would  necessitate  the  repetition  in  great  measure  of 
what  we  have  learned  in  the  second  period.  We  shall 
confine  ourselves  to  noticing  that  which  is  new  and 
characteristic  in  our  period,  not  that  which  it  has  in 
common  with  the  preceding  periods. 

Several  documents  of  Judaism  are  characterized  by 
the  fact  that  in  them  virtue  is  represented  as  true  wis- 
dom. According  to  the  oldest  documents  the  first  duty 
of  Israel  is  the  practice  of  righteousness  to  please  the 
righteous  God.  The  later  documents  rise  to  the  idea 
of  the  wisdom  of  God;  hence  the  statement  is  very 
frequent  that  the  true  Israelite  should  seek  and  prac- 
tise wisdom.     This  mode  of  thought  and  expression 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  33.   ETHICAL  LIFE.  327 

first  appears  in  the  book  of  Job  and  in  the  Proverbs ; 
it  is  the  ruling  one  in  Sirach  and  Wisdom.  Erroneous 
ideas  on  this  subject  have  more  than  once  found  utter- 
ance :  let  us  then  try  to  bring  to  light  the  truth  con- 
cerning it. 

Oehler  makes  a  striking  distinction  between  the 
wisdom  books  and  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. The  former  are,  in  his  opinion,  the  product  of 
a  less  direct  divine  inspiration ;  the  sentence  of  the  sage 
cannot  be  placed  on  the  same  level  as  the  word  of  Jeho- 
vah; it  is  the  product  of  his  experience  and  reflection.^ 
Bruch  goes  still  farther.  He  not  only  distinguishes 
the  sages  from  the  priests  and  the  prophets,  he  contrasts 
the  two  parties,  making  the  first  free-thinkers,  but 
slightly  attached  to  the  theocratic  and  traditional  re- 
ligion of  Israel,  veritable  philosophers  who,  like  philo- 
sophers in  general,  rose  by  the  exercise  of  their  reason 
from  the  empirical  and  accidental  to  the  absolute.  ^ 
Now  we  think  that  these  two  scholars  are  mistaken.  In 
Israel  no  distinction  was  made,  as  there  is  among  us, 
between  natural  and  supernatural  revelation,  between 
a  less  and  a  more  direct  divine  inspiration,  between  the 
products  of  an  unassisted  and  an  inspired  reason ;  they 
thought  that  everything  in  the  world  depended  abso- 
lutely and  directly  upon  God.  We  have  even  seen 
that  objective  wisdom  is  identified  with  the  spirit  and 
the  word  of  God,  that  it  is  represented  as  an  emanation 
from  God,  and  as  the  source  of  the  subjective  wisdom 
of  man.  This  latter,  then,  is  not  the  product  of  pure 
reason  but  of  divine  wisdom,  as  the  prophetic  preach- 
ing is  the  product  of  divine  inspiration.  It  has  for  its 
1  §  235.  2  Weisheitslehre  der  Hehraer,  pp.  48  ft. 


328  THEOLOGY   OF   THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

basis  faith  and  not  speculation.  Finally  it  pursues  a 
practical  and  not  a  speculative  or  theoretical  object  like 
philosophy. 

The  sages  in  Israel  believe  in  the  same  God  as  the 
rest  of  the  people.  They  do  not  oppose  the  traditional 
religion ;  they  take  it  as  their  foundation.  This  is  seen 
in  Job  and  Ecclesiastes,  where  a  critical  tendency  can 
be  more  easily  discovered  than  elsewhere.  In  the  wis- 
dom books  it  is  possible,  it  is  true,  to  cite  passages  in 
which  external  worship  is  opposed;  but  similar  pas- 
sages are  also  found  in  the  prophets.  These  books  do 
not  concern  themselves  about  the  future  of  the  king- 
dom of  God;  but  the  prophets  themselves  have  the 
present  much  more  in  view  than  the  future,  and  in  all 
the  legislative  documents  of  the  Old  Testament  the 
messianic  hope  is  left  out  of  sight.  The  sages  in 
Israel,  the  prophets,  the  legislators,  and  the  historians, 
pursued  one  and  the  same  object,  —  to  teach  their  people 
the  fear  of  God  and  incline  them  to  faithfully  keep  his 
commandments.  When  compared  with  the  points  of 
likeness,  the  differences  among  them  are  merely  secon- 
dary ;  they  are  differences  of  form  and  not  of  substance. 
The  most  important  is  perhaps  that  the  prophets,  legis- 
lators, and  historians,  give  their  principal  attention  to 
the  people  as  a  whole,  while  the  sages  prefer  to  fix 
theirs  upon  the  individual  life.  This  is  the  reason  why 
the  latter  leave  out  of  sight  the  future  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  which  is  identified  with  the  future  of  the  peo- 
ple Israel.  But,  after  these  general  considerations,  let 
us  see  what  the  Scriptures  themselves  say  of  subjective 
wisdom,  that  we  may  corroborate  what  has  just  been 
said. 


THIRD   PERIOD. — §  33.    ETHICAL   LIFE.  320 

The  wisdom  of  man  merits  no  confidence.^  True 
wisdom  is  not  found  on  earth;  it  is  hidden  from  the 
eyes  of  men ;  it  can  only  be  found  with  God,  who  is  its 
source.^  Those  who  do  evil  do  not  understand  what  is 
righteous,  but  those  who  seek  God  understand  every- 
thing.^ The  law  of  God  and  the  observance  of  the  law 
secure  true  wisdom.*  It  is  only  bestowed  on  souls  that 
love  it,  that  seek  it  b}^  prayer,  and  keep  themselves  from 
evil.^  The  beginning  of  wisdom  is  the  fear  of  God.^ 
Both  alike  consist  in  keeping  the  commandments  of 
God,  which  they  at  the  same  time  make  man  capable  of 
doing,  thus  rendering  him  virtuous ; "  they  consist  in, 
and  incline  to,  hatred  and  avoidance  of  evil.^  Thus  they 
secure  to  man  all  sorts  of  blessings,  especially  life.^ 
While  wisdom  is  closely  related  to  the  fear  of  God  on 
the  one  hand,  it  is  just  as  closely  related  to  chastise- 
ment on  the  other.  ^^  This  latter  may  come  from  God 
or  man,  but  if  it  be  received  with  submission  it  leads 


1  Prov.  iii.  5,  7  ;  xxx.  2  ff. ;  Wis.  ix.  6. 

2  Job  xxviii.  12-28  ;  xxxii.  8  f .  ;  Prov.  viii.  22-36  ;  ii.  6  ;  1  Kings  iii. 
12  ;  Ex.  xxxi.  3,  6 ;  xxxvi.  1  1 ;  Eccl.  ii.  26  ;  Sir.  i.  1,  26  ;  Bar.  iii.  15 
ff.,  29  ff.  ;  Wis.  vii.  7,  15 ;  viii.  21  ;  ix.  10,  17.  ^  Prov.  xxviii.  5. 

^  Ps.  xix.  7  f. ;  xxxvii.  30  f.;  cxix.  98  ff.,  130;  Sir.  i.  26;  xxiv. 
23-27  ;  xxxix.  1  ff. 

5  1  Kings  iii.  10  ff.  ;  Sir.  i.  10 ;  xv.  1  ff. ;  Ii.  19  ff.  ;  Wis.  i.  4  f.  ;  vi. 
12  ff.,  17  ff. ;  vii.  7,  27  ;  viii.  21  -ix.  1  ff. 

*^  Job.  xxviii.  28  ;  Prov.  i.  7,  29 ;  ix.  10 ;  Ps.  cxi.  10 ;  Sir.  i.  14,  16, 
20,  27. 

^  Deut.  iv.  6  ;  vi.  2,  13,  24  ;  viii.  6  ;  Eccl.  xii.  IS  ;  Sir.  xix.  20  ;  Wis. 
viii.  7. 

8  Job  xxviii.  28  ;  Prov.  ii.  10  ff. ;  iii.  7  ;  viii.  13  ;  xiv.  16  ;  xvi.  6. 

9  Prov.  iii.  1  f.,  16-18  ;  iv.  8  ff.  ;  viii.  12  ff.,  33-36  ;  ix.  10  1  ;  x.  27  j 
xiii.  14  ;  xiv.  27  ;  xvi.  22  ;  xix.  23 ;  xxiv.  3  ff . ;  Eccl.  vii.  12. 

!«>  Prov.  i.  2,  7  ;  xxiii.  23, 


330  THEOLOGY   OF   THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

in  both  cases  to  wisdom. ^  Thus  one  must  be  humble 
and  docile  to  become  wise.^  Chastisement,  like  wis- 
dom and  the  fear  of  God,  leads  to  life.^  From  the 
foregoing  it  is  easy  to  perceive  that  wisdom  is  of  in- 
calculable value.*  The  opposite  of  the  sage  is  the  fool, 
who  says  in  his  heart  that  there  is  no  God,^  and  who 
finds  pleasure  in  doing  evil.^  Thus  by  associating 
with  fools,  one  becomes  depraved.'^ 

/  It  is  plain  that  Israelitish  wisdom  is  essentially  relig- 
ious and  practical,  and  that  its  character  is  misunder- 
stood when  it  is  identified  with  philosophy.  Even  in 
Job  and  Ecclesiastes,  the  two  canonical  books  in  which, 
if  anywhere,  it  would  be  possible  to  find  a  philosophical 
tendency,  the  problems  proposed  are  treated  only  from 
the  standpoint  of  practical  life.  Israelitish  wisdom 
takes  no  account  of  abstract  or  purely  metaphysical 
questions.  It  feels  still  less  need  of  elaborating  a 
system  of  philosophy  or  dogmatics ;  at  least  no  trace  of 
one  is  found  anywhere  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  is 
only  the  apocryphal  book  of  Wisdom  and  other  writings 
of  Alexandrian  Judaism,  in  which  speculation  begins 
to  appear.  But  in  these  we  no  longer  have  pure  prod- 
ucts of  the  Israelitish  mind.  These  documents  were 
greatly  influenced  by  Greek  philosophy. 

The  essential  object  pursued  by  Israelitish  wisdom  is 
expressed  in  these  words  of  Ecclesiastes,  which  are,  in 
a  sense,  a  resume  of  the  religion  of  Israel:  "Fear  God 

1  Prov.  i.  1  f.,  8  ;  iii.  11-13  ;  iv.  1  ;  vi.  20 ;  viii.  33  ;  xii.  1  ;  xiii.  1, 
24  ;  XV.  5 ;  xix.  20  ;  Job  v.  17  ;  Ps.  xlix.  11. 

2  Prov.  xi.  2.  8  Prov.  iv.  13  ;  x.  17. 

4  Job  xxviii.  15-19  ;   Prov.  iii.  13-18  ;   viii.   11  ;    xvi.  16 ;    xx.  15 ; 

Eccl.  vii.  19  ;  ix.  16  ;  Sir.  vi.  30  f.  ;  xxiv.  20  ;  Wis.  vii.  8-10,  14  ;  viii.  5. 

^  Ps.  xiv.  1  ;  liii.  1.  ^  prov.  x.  23  ;  xiv.  9.  "^  Prov.  xiii.  20. 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  34.    APOCALYPSE   OF   DANIEL.      331 

and  keep  his  commandments,  for  this  is  the  whole  duty 
of  man. "  ^  The  tendency  here  dominant  is  also  apparent 
in  the  beautiful  passage  of  Proverbs  enjoining  that  the 
heart  be  watched  more  than  anything  else,  because  from 
it  flow  the  sources  of  life.^  We  should,  moreover,  add 
that  it  is  easy  to  find  in  the  wisdom  books,  especially 
Proverbs  and  Sirach,  passages  in  which  wisdom  is  only 
prudence,  inspired  by  utilitarian  considerations,  and 
having  for  its  sole  object  the  attainment  of  happiness 
and  the  avoidance  of  misfortune.  Thus  vice  is  often 
represented  as  folly,  bringing  one  to  misfortune  and 
destruction. 


§  34.     THE  APOCALYPSE  OF  DANIEL. 

From  Malachi  to  Daniel  we  must  leap  a  great  space 
of  time  during  which  there  were  no  prophets.  There 
were  none  in  the  times  of  the  Maccabees,^  the  date  of 
the  book  of  which  we  have  still  to  treat,  whose  author 
distinguishes  himself  from  the  prophets.*  The  great 
distance  that  separates  this  book  from  the  old  propheti- 
cal books  explains,  in  part,  the  difference  as  to  general 
character  existing  between  them.  We  have  here,  as  it 
were,  a  continuation  of  ancient  prophetism,  predictions, 
the  great  majority  of  which  relate  to  the  end  of  the 
world  and  the  establishment  of  the  Messianic  kingdom. 
These  predictions  are  even  more  precise  than  those  of 
any  of  the  old  prophetical  books.  The  result  is  that 
the  book  of  Daniel  has  been  regarded  as  the  prophetical 
book  par  excellence  by  the  theology  that  identifies  proph- 

1  xii.  15.  ■         2  iv.  23. 

3  1  Mace.  iv.  46  ;  ix.  27  ;  xiv.  41.  *  Dan.  ix.  6. 


332  THEOLOGY   OF    THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

ecy  with  prediction  of  the  future.  If,  on  the  other 
hand,  prophecy  be  understood  as  prophetic  preaching, 
such  as  we  find  in  Israel  down  to  the  time  of  Malachi, 
it  will  be  admitted  that  the  book  of  Daniel  belongs  to 
another  class  of  writings,  to  that  of  apocalypses.  We 
possess  a  number,  among  which  our  book  takes  the 
first  place  as  respects  antiquity.  But  of  all  the  prod- 
ucts of  this  kind  two  only  are  honored  with  a  place  in 
the  biblical  canon:  our  book  and  the  apocalypse  of 
John. 

These  two  books  have  generally  been  misunderstood. 
Until  lately  a  sound  and  correct  method  of  interpreta- 
tion for  them  had  not  been  adopted.  But  here,  as  else- 
where, it  was  very  difficult  for  truth  to  triumph  over 
hoary  error.  Many  conservative  theologians  insist  on 
following  the  wanderings  of  traditional  exegesis,  pre- 
ferring arbitrary  interpretations  to  the  results  of  the  his- 
torical and  only  true  method.  If  one  undertakes  with- 
out prejudice  the  study  of  these  two  books,  one  does 
not  meet  the  difficulties  which  have  often  been  found 
therein,  which,  in  fact,  are  due  to  the  false  standpoint 
from  which  they  are  usually  studied.  Confining  our- 
selves to  the  book  of  Daniel,  we  shall  begin  by  consid- 
ering the  last  three  chapters,  which  are  very  simple  and 
clear,  and  which  furnish  the  key  to  the  principal  pre- 
dictions contained  in  the  others. 

Chapter  x.  tells  us  how  Daniel,  in  a  vision,  received 
a  communication  concerning  that  which  was  afterward 
to  befall  his  people.  Chapter  xi.  next  unfolds  before 
our  eyes  the  history  of  the  period  from  Cyrus  to  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes.  There  is  first  a  brief  reference  to 
the  three  successors  of  Cyrus  and  the  short-lived  domin- 


THIRD  PERIOD.  —  §  34.   APOCALYPSE  OF  DANIEL.      333 

ion  of  Alexander,  whose  empire  is  soon  to  be  divided.  ^ 
The  author  dwells  at  greater  length  on  the  history  of 
the  Ptolemies  and  the  Seleucides,  with  which  he  was 
evidently  more  familiar. ^  He  finally  reaches  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  and  devotes  to  him  even  more  space. ^ 

He  speaks  first  of  his  wars  against  Egypt,  on  his 
return  from  which  he  turned  his  arms  against  the  people 
of  the  covenant.^  He  then  announces  that  Antiochus 
will  direct  a  new  attack  against  Egypt,  but  that  he  will 
not  succeed,  because  of  the  interference  of  the  Romans, 
and  that  then  he  will  divert  his  fury  against  the  Jewish 
people ;  he  will  leave  troops  in  Palestine  who  will  pro- 
fane the  sanctuar}^,  cause  the  daily  sacrifice  to  cease 
and  set  up  the  abomination  of  the  destroyer ;  he  will, 
by  his  flatteries,  seduce  the  unfaithful  Jews ;  but  those 
of  the  people  who  acknowledge  God  will  act  with  firm- 
ness and  instruct  the  multitude,  which  will  bring  upon 
them  persecution.^  The  author  adds  that  Antiochus 
will  uplift  himself  against  all  the  gods  and  say  incredi- 
ble things  against  the  God  of  gods;  but  that  he  will 
honor  the  god  of  the  fortresses  (Jupiter  Capitolinus) 
whom  his  fathers  did  not  know.^  At  the  time  of  the 
end,  a  last  conflict  will  take  place  between  this  king 
and  the  king  of  Egypt;  the  former  will  be  victorious 
and  invade  Palestine,  while  Edom,  Moab,  and  Ammon 
will  be  spared;  but  news  from  the  east  and  the  north 
will  come  to  frighten  him;  he  will  depart  with  great 

1  vv.  2-4. 

2  vv.  5-20.  For  the  explanation  of  the  details  of  this  and  the 
following  passages,  see  the  commentaries. 

3  vv.  21  ff. 

*  vv.  21-28  ;  comp.  1  Mace.  i.  17-29  ;  2  Mace.  v.  11  ff. 

5  w.  29-35 ;  comp.  1  Mace.  i.  30.  ^  ^^.  36_39. 


334  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

fury  to  destroy  multitudes ;  he  will  pitch  his  camp  be- 
tween the  sea  and  the  holy  mountain;  then  he  will 
come  to  his  end,  with  no  one  to  help  him.^  At  that 
time,  which  will  be  a  time  of  distress  such  as  there  has 
not  been  since  the  nations  existed,  the  Jews  written  in 
the  book  of  life  will  be  saved ;  their  dead  will  arise, 
some  to  life  everlasting  and  others  to  everlasting  dis- 
grace. A  peculiar  glory  will  be  bestowed  upon  those 
who  have  taught  righteousness  to  others.  This  change 
will  be  produced  by  Michael,  the  great  chief  of  the 
Jewish  people,  who  defends  it  against  the  chief  of 
the  kingdom  of  the  Persians  and  against  that  of  the 
Greeks. 2  The  end  of  the  world  and  the  inauguration 
of  the  Messianic  kingdom  is,  in  fact,  to  come  three  and 
a  half  years  or  a  thousand  two  hundred  and  ninety  days 
after  Antiochus  has  caused  the  perpetual  sacrifice  to 
cease  and  set  up  the  abomination  in  the  temple.^ 

Making  what  has  just  been  said  our  starting-point, 
we  shall  avoid  any  difficulty  in  understanding  the 
other  more  mysterious  predictions  of  our  book,  touch- 
ing the  end  of  the  world  and  the  inauguration  of  the 
Messianic  kingdom. 

The  first  of  these  predictions  is  found  in  Chapter  ii. 
Nebuchadnezzar  had  had  a  dream  which  he  could  not 
recall,  but  of  which  he  nevertheless  desired  an  inter- 
pretation. Now  since  the  wise  men  of  Babylon  could 
not  tell  the  dream  and  its  interpretation,  he  had  them 
put  to  death.  Then  the  God  of  the  heavens  revealed 
the  secret  to  Daniel,  who  made  it  known  to  the  king. 
In  this  dream  Nebuchadnezzar  had  seen  a  great  statue, 

1  vv.  40-45.  2  xii.  1-3  ;  x.  13-20  f. 

»  xU.  4-13  J  comp.  xi.  31  ;  1  Mace.  i.  46  f.,  57 ;  Ti.  7. 


THIRD  PERIOD.— §  34.    APOCALYPSE  OF   DANIEL.      335 

whose  head  was  of  gold,  the  breast  and  the  arms  of  silver, 
the  belly  and  the  thighs  of  brass,  the  legs  of  iron,  the  feet 
partly  of  iron  and  partly  of  clay ;  then  a  stone  had  loosed 
itself  without  the  aid  of  hands,  it  had  smitten  the  feet 
of  iron  and  clay,  of  the  statue,  and  broken  them  in 
pieces;  then  the  iron,  the  clay,  the  brass,  the  silver, 
and  the  gold  had  all  been  broken  and  had  become  like 
the  chaff  that  escapes  from  a  threshing-floor  in  summer; 
the  wind  had  carried  them  away  and  no  trace  of  them 
had  been  discovered ;  but  the  stone  that  smote  the  statue 
had  become  a  great  mountain  filling  the  whole  earth.  ^ 
According  to  the  explanation  given  by  Daniel,  the 
golden  head  is  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his  empire. ^  The 
breast  represents  a  kingdom  inferior  to  his.^.  This  is 
evidently  that  of  the  Medes  and  not  that  of  the  Persians, 
which  was  greater  and  mightier  than  that  of  the  Chal- 
deans. According  to  the  author  of  our  book,  the  last 
king  of  the  Chaldeans  was  replaced  by  Darius  the  Mede,* 
who  inaugurated  a  new  dynasty.  The  third  kingdom, 
which  will  be  of  brass  and  is  destined  to  rule  the  whole 
earth,^  is  that  of  the  Persians.^  Our  author  distin- 
guishes the  kingdom  and  the  kings  of  the  Medes  from 
those  of  the  Persians,  and  connects  with  Cyrus  a  new 
dynasty,  that  of  the  Persians,  as  he  connects  that  of  the 
Medes  with  Darius.^  The  fourth  kingdom,  partly 
strong  as  iron  and  partly  fragile  as  clay,  which  is  to  be 
divided,^  is  therefore  the  kingdom  of  the  Greeks.  The 
alliances  which  will  not  issue  in  a  real  uaion^  are  those 

1  ii.  31-35.  2  ^.  38.  3  ^.  39. 

4  V.  30  ;  vi.  1  ;  ix.  1  ;  xi.  1.  ^  ii.  39. 

6  Comp.  Ezra  i.  2.  ''  vi.  28  ;  viii.  20 ;  x.  1. 
8  ii.  40-42.                        »  ii.  43. 


336      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

of  the  Seleucides  and  the  Ptolemies,^  who  will  not 
attain  union  with  each  other  by  a  lasting  peace.  In  the 
days  of  these  kings  the  God  of  the  heavens  will  raise 
up  a  kingdom  that  will  never  be  destroyed,  that  will 
not  pass  under  the  rule  of  another  people,  that  will 
break  and  destroy  all  these  kingdoms  and  itself  endure 
forever.^  All  this  agrees  admirably  with  what  we  have 
seen  above,  viz.^  that  the  Messianic  kingdom  will 
immediately  succeed  that  of  the  Greeks,  in  the  time  of 
the  Ptolemies  and  the  Seleucides,  or  more  exactly  in 
that  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  This  will  be  confirmed 
by  what  follows. 

The  second  messianic  prediction  of  our  book  is  found 
in  Chapter  vii.  Daniel  had  a  nocturnal  vision,  in  which 
he  saw  four  different  animals  come  forth  from  the  sea. 
The  first  was  like  a  lion  and  had  eagle's  wings;  the 
second  was  like  a  bear  and  was  to  eat  much  flesh.  The 
third  was  like  a  leopard,  and  had  four  wings  and  four 
heads.  The  fourth  was  terrible  and  extraordinarily 
strong ;  he  had  great  iron  teeth,  he  ate,  broke,  and  trod 
under  foot  what  remained;  he  had  ten  horns,  but  a  little 
horn  came  forth  from  their  midst  and  three  of  the  first 
horns  were  broken  before  this  horn,  which  had  eyes  like 
man's  eyes  and  a  mouth  that  spoke  arrogantly.  Then 
Daniel  saw  the  ancient  of  days  seat  himself  upon  his 
throne  surrounded  by  thousands  of  servants,  to  proceed 
to  judgment;  the  animals  were  stripped  of  their  might 
and  the  fourth  was  slain  and  cast  into  the  fire,  because  of 
the  arrogant  words  uttered  by  the  horn.  After  that  he 
saw  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  some  one  resembling 
a  son  of  man,  who  approached  the  ancient  of  days ;  to 
1  xi.  6.  2  ii.  44^ 


THIRD   PERIOD.  —  §  34.    APOCALYPSE   OF   DANIEL.      337 

him  was  given  dominion,  glory,  and  kingship,  and  all 
the  peoples  served  him ;  his  dominion  is  an  everlasting 
dominion  and  his  kingdom  is  never  to  be  destroyed.  ^ 
Daniel  inquired  of  an  angel  the  meaning  of  all  these 
things,  and  learned  that  the  four  beasts  were  four  kings 
who  were  to  arise  from  the  earth. 2  He  desired  expressly 
to  know  the  truth  concerning  the  fourth  animal, 
concerning  the  ten  horns  that  it  had  on  its  head,  and 
concerning  that  which  had  come  forth  from  among  the 
others  and  appeared  greater  than  they,  which  he  had 
seen  make  war  on  the  saints  of  the  Most-High  and  over- 
come them  until  the  time  when  the  ancient  of  days 
came  to  do  them  justice  and  put  them  in  possession  of 
the  kingdom.^  He  received  this  explanation:  The 
fourth  animal  is  a  fourth  kingdom  that  will  devour  all 
the  earth;  the  ten  horns  are  ten  kings  who  will  arise 
from  this  kingdom ;  another  will  come  after  them  who 
will  be  different  from  the  first  and  who  will  humble 
three  kings;  he  will  utter  words  against  the  Most- 
High;  he  will  oppress  the  saints  of  the  Most-High,  and 
he  will  hope  to  change  the  times  and  the  law;  the 
saints  will  be  delivered  into  his  hands  for  a  time,  two 
times  and  half  a  time,  i.e,  three  and  a  half  3'ears;  then 
will  come  the  judgment,  the  dominion  Avill  be  taken 
from  this  king,  and  everlasting  dominion  over  all 
the  kingdoms  that  are  under  heaven  will  be  given 
to  the  people  of  the  saints  of  the  Most-High.^  It  is 
evident  that  the  little  horn  on  which  the  author  of  our 
book  especially  dwells,  is  Antiochus  Epiphanes,^  whose 

1  vii.  1-14.  2  vii.  15-17.  3  vii.  19-22.  *  vii.  23-27. 

5  Comp.  what  is  said  in  this  chapter  with  xi.  31,  36 ;  1  Mace.  i. 
46  ff. ;  2  Mace.  vi.  6. 


338  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

dominion  must  come  to  an  end  after  three  and  a  half 
years,  according  to  verse  25  of  our  chapter,  as  accord- 
ing to  xii.  1.  The  fourth  animal,  then,  represents  the 
Greek  empire  founded  by  Alexander,  and  the  ten  horns 
of  his  head  ten  kings,  his  successors;  the  third  animal 
is  the  Persian  empire,  and  its  four  heads  are  four  kings, 
our  author  not  being  acquainted  with  a  greater  number;  ^ 
the  second  animal  is  naturally  the  Medean  empire,  and 
the  first  the  Babylonian  empire.  According  to  this 
chapter,  also,  the  Messianic  empire  is  to  immediately 
follow  that  of  the  Greeks  in  the  time  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes.  Thus  far  all  the  competent  and  impartial 
exegetes  of  our  day  are  agreed ;  but  they  differ  on  the 
question.  Who  is  the  some  one  like  a  son  of  man  who 
comes  on  the  clouds  of  heaven  and  obtains  everlasting 
dominion  over  all  the  peoples  7^  The  general  opinion 
has  always  been  that  it  is  the  Messiah.  Even  in  the  book 
of  Enoch  this  latter  receives  the  title.  Son  of  man.^  It 
is  also  well  known  that  Jesus  preferred  this  title  as  a 
Messianic  designation  for  himself.  But  as  the  book  of 
Daniel  nowhere  speaks  of  the  Messiah,  though  it  says 
much  of  the  coming  of  the  Messianic  kingdom,  some 
modern  scholars  have  thought  that  this  expression  serves 
to  designate,  not  the  Messiah,  but  the  Messianic  king- 
dom; that  this  latter  is  compared  to  a  man  coming  from 
heaven,  on  account  of  its  high  dignity  and  its  celestial 
origin,  while  the  heathen  powers,  the  powers  of  this 
world,  are  compared  to  animals  coming  forth  from  the 
sea,  on  account  of  their  inferior  dignity  and  their  ter- 

1  xi.  2.  2  vii.  13  f. 

3  Wittichen,  Beitrage  znr  bibl    Theol.  II.  pp.  67  ff.,  IIL  p.  128; 
Stapfer,  p.  123  ;   [Toy,  p.  354] . 


THIRD   PERIOD.  — §  34.    APOCALYPSE   OF   DANIEL.      339 

restrial  origin.  What  favors  this  view  is  that  in  the 
explanatory  part  of  our  chapter  the  kingdom  is  con- 
stantly promised  to  the  saints  of  the  Most-High, ^  i.e. 
to  the  Jewish  people. 

Chapter  viii.  contains  another  vision  of  Daniel.  A 
ram  appeared  to  him  that  had  two  horns,  one  of  which 
was  higher  than  the  other  and  rose  last.  This  ram 
smote  with  his  horns  toAvard  the  east,  the  north,  and 
the  south,  and  no  other  animal  was  able  to  resist  him.^ 
Daniel  then  saw  a  he -goat  coming  from  the  west,  that 
passed  through  the  whole  earth  without  touching  it, 
and  had  a  great  horn  between  the  eyes ;  and  he  smote 
the  ram,  and  broke  his  two  horns,  and  cast  him  to  the 
earth,  and  trampled  on  him,  and  no  one  could  deliver 
him.  But  when  this  he-goat  had  become  very  mighty 
his  great  horn  was  broken,  and  four  great  horns  arose 
in  its  place  toward  the  four  winds  of  heaven.^  From 
one  of  these  went  forth  a  little  horn  that  grew  much 
toward  the  south,  the  east,  and  the  most  beautiful  of 
countries  (Judea) ;  it  exalted  itself  to  the  host  of  heaven 
and  to  the  chief  of  the  host,  from  whom  it  removed  the 
perpetual  sacrifice,  overthrowing  his  holy  place ;  it  finally 
cast  truth  to  the  earth ;  and  this  profanation  was  to  last 
two  thousand  and  three  hundred  evenings  and  morn- 
ings, after  which  the  sanctuary  would  be  purified."* 
According  to  the  explanation  that  the  angel  Gabriel 
gives  to  Daniel,  the  ram  represents  the  king  of  the 
Medes  and  Persians.^  The  smaller  horn  of  the  ram  is 
the  power  of  the  Medes,  and  the  larger  that  arose  after- 
ward the  power  of  the  Persians ;  ^  and  since,  according 

1  vv.  18,  22,  17.  2  vv.  3  f.  ^  Comp.  xi.  4. 

4  viii.  5-14,  5  viii.  20,  ^  Comp.  ii.  59. 


340  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

to  history,  the  latter  absorbed  the  former  both  may  be 
represented  by  a  single  animal  having  two  horns.  As 
for  the  he-goat,  it  is  the  king  of  Javan,  the  king  of 
Greece;  the  great  horn  between  the  eyes  is  the  first 
king  (Alexander);  the  fonr  horns  that  arise  to  take 
the  place  of  this  broken  horn  are  four  kingdoms  which 
Vv'ill  arise  f.om  this  nation,  but  which  will  not  have  so 
much  strength  (they  are  tlie  four  kingdoms  that  Avere 
tinall}^  formed  from  the  empire  of  Alexander);  at  the 
close  of  their  dominion  there  will  arise  a  shameless  and 
crafty  king  whose  power  will  grow,  who  will  destroy 
the  powerful  and  also  the  people  of  the  saints,  who  will 
cause  many  peaceable  men  to  perish,  and  will  exalt  him- 
self against  the  prince  of  princes ;  but  he  will  be  broken 
without  hands.  1  If  we  compare  this  vision  with  the 
preceding  we  see  clearly  that  we  again  close  with  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes,  the  chief  object  of  our  book.  It 
is  he  who  is  represented  by  the  little  horn  that  rises 
from  one  of  the  four  horns, ^  or  from  the  kingdom  of 
Syria ;  for  all  that  is  here  said  of  him  agrees  with  the 
previous  references  to  him.  This  vision,  like  those 
preceding,  relates  to  the  end  of  all  things,  the  end  of 
the  world. '^  We  have  seen  that  the  end  will  come  when 
the  people  of  the  saints  shall  have  been  oppressed, 
and  the  perpetual  sacrifice  interrupted  three  and  a  half 
years,  or  1290  daj^s.*  According  to  our  chapter  thi  > 
time  is  to  last  2300  evenings  and  mornings,^  or  1150 
days,  which  make  only  a  little  more  than  three  years. 
The  difference  between  the  two  intervals  is,  therefore, 

1  viii.  21-35.  2  yiii.  9. 

3  viii.  17,  19,  23  ;  comp.  x.  14  ;  xi.  35  f.,  40. 

4  vii.  25  ;  xii.  7,  11.  ^  V.  14. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  — §  34.    APOCALYPSE   OF   DANIEL.      341 

inconsiderable,  and  is  explained  by  the  very  natural 
supposition  that  the  visions  of  our  book  do  not  all  date 
from  the  same  time,  that  there  was  an  interval  between 
them. 

Chapter  ix.  informs  us  that  Daniel,  seeing  from  the 
book  of  Jeremiah  1  that  the  overthrow  and  oppression 
of  Jerusalem  was  to  last  seventy  years,  wished  to  know 
how  this  prediction  was  to  be  understood. ^  This  desire 
seems  the  more  natural  at  the  time  when  our  book  was 
composed,  since  several  centuries  had  elapsed  without 
the  fulfilment  of  this  prophecy,  and  the  Jews  still 
groaned  under  the  hated  yoke  of  the  stranger.  After  an 
ardent  prayer,  in  which  Daniel  confesses  the  sins  of 
his  people  and  implores  the  forgiveness  of  God,^  the 
angel  Gabriel  comes  to  explain  to  him  that  the  seventy 
years  in  question  are  weeks  of  years,  or  periods  of  seven 
years.  This  lapse  of  time  was  determined  to  put  an 
end  to  sins,  to  expiate  iniquity,  to  bring  in  everlasting 
righteousness,  and  to  anoint  the  holy  of  holies.*  From 
the  date  when  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  was  uttered  to 
that  when  a  prince  will  be  anointed  there  are  seven 
weeks ;  for  sixty-two  more  weeks  the  places  and  moats 
will  be  rebuilt,  but  in  troublous  times;  then,  in  the 
last  week  an  anointed  one  will  be  cut  off,  the  city  and 
the  sanctuary  will  be  destroyed  by  the  people  of  a  prince 
whose  end  will  come  as  by  a  flood,  who,  for  a  week,  will 
make  a  firm  alliance  with  many,  and  will  for  half  a  week 
cause  the  sacrifice  and  offering  to  cease,  who  will  commit 
the  most  abominable  deeds  until  overthrow  finally  breaks 
upon  him.^     In  spite  of  some  obscurities  in  this  proph- 

1  XXV.  11  ff. ;  xxix.  10.  ^  ix.  1  ff.  3  ix.  5  ff. 

4  Comp.  viii.  14.  ^  ix.  20  ff. 


342      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

ecy  the  essential  points  are  perfectly  clear.  Thus,  the 
seventy  years  of  Jeremiah  become  weeks  of  j^ears, 
i.e.  periods  of  seven  years.  These  seventy  weeks  of 
years  are  divided  into  three  periods,  of  which  the  first 
includes  seven  weeks,  or  forty-nine  years,  the  second 
sixty-two  weeks,  or  434  years,  the  third  one  week,  or 
seven  years.  Since,  according  to  vv.  26  f.,  the  prince 
who  is  to  reign  during  this  last  week  will  cause  the 
sacrifice  and  offering  to  cease  for  half  a  week,  i.e.  for 
three  and  a  half  years,  and  since  all  that  is  here  said 
perfectly  agrees  with  what  we  have  seen  touching  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes  and  the  end  of  the  world,  ^  we  are 
authorized  in  saying  that  this  prophecy,  like  those  pre- 
ceding, closes  with  this  prince,  that  this  is  the  limit 
of  the  prophetic  horizon  of  our  author,  as  well  as  the 
end  of  the  ills  of  the  Jewish  people  and  the  end  of  the 
world,  which  will  be  followed  by  the  Messianic  king- 
dom. As  to  the  first  period  of  seven  weeks,  it  extends 
from  the  prediction  of  Jeremiah  to  Cyrus  the  anointed 
one,  to  whom  reference  is  made  in  v.  25. ^  The  second 
period  of  sixty-two  weeks,  then,  necessarily  extends 
from  Cyrus  to  Antiochus.  The  anointed  one  who 
will  be  cut  off  at  the  end  of  this  period  is  probably 
the  high-priest  Onias  whose  death  is  mentioned, 
2  Mace.  iv.  34.  This  lapse  of  time,  it  is  true,  is  more 
than  half  a  century  too  short,  according  to  exact 
chronology.  But  instead  of  taking  useless  pains  to 
make  this  prediction  agree  with  chronology,  we  must 
rather  admit  that,  in  the  days  of  our  author,  the  Jews 
did  not  have  a  thorough  chronology,  and  that  he  him- 

1  See  especially  vii.  25  ;  viii.  11-14  ;  xi.  31,  36,  45  ;  xii.  7,  11. 

2  Comp.  Isa.  xlv,  1. 


CONCLUSION.  343 

self,  in  many  a  passage  of  his  book,  proves  that  he  was 
acquainted  only  with  the  grand  outlines  of  history. 
The  historian  Josephus  made  a  similar  mistake.^  That 
here  noticed  ought  to  surprise  us  the  less  since  our  book 
has  a  practical  and  not  a  historical  aim. 

Though  the  apocalypse  of  Daniel  foretells  the  com- 
ing of  the  Messianic  era  in  a  series  of  prophecies,  it 
nowhere  gives  a  description  of  it,  as  most  of  the  old 
prophets  did.  It  is  content  with  leading  us  to  the 
threshold  of  the  new  era  which  is  to  begin  with  the  ap- 
proaching end  of  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  the 
great  persecutor  of  the  faithful  Jews  and  their  religion. 
It  is  content  to  say  repeatedly  that  this  era  will  be  that 
of  the  universal  and  everlasting  dominion  of  the  saints 
of  the  Most-High,  i.e.  of  the  faithful  Jews,  and,  there- 
fore, of  their  God.^  In  this  our  author  is  inspired  with 
the  view  of  the  old  prophets ;  it  is  the  same  when  he 
teaches  that  the  end  of  the  world  and  the  Messianic 
kingdom  are  very  near,  when  he  sees  in  the  political 
events  of  his  time  the  precursors  of  the  final  judgment, 
a  prelude  to  the  Messianic  era. 


CONCLUSION. 

Having  fulfilled  our  task  as  historian,  we  might  now 
lay  down  our  pen.  Before  doing  so,  however,  we  be- 
lieve it  our  duty  to  add  some  remarks  in  response,  not 
to  the  historical,  but  to  the  religious  interest,  the  inter- 
est of  faith. 

The  Bible  was  originally  a  book  for  the  edification 

1  Scliiirer,  The  Jewish  People,  etc.,  Div.  I.  Vol.  I.  p.  81. 

2  See  especially  iv.  3. 


344  THEOLOGY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT 

of  the  pious.  Later  the  theologians  made  it  a  fountain 
of  doctrine,  a  dogmatic  authority,  the  supreme  and 
infallible  authority  in  matters  of  faith.  Thenceforth 
it  hardly  occurred  to  any  one  to  study  the  Bible  except 
from  the  dogmatic  standpoint.  It  was  left  for  those  of 
our  day  to  begin  to  study  it  as  a  historical  document, 
and  according  to  the  historical  method.  Biblical  the- 
ology as  a  historical  science  is,  in  fact,  of  recent  date. 
But  there  is  now  danger  of  going  to  the  opposite  extreme 
and  studying  the  Bible  henceforth  only  from  the  his- 
torical and  critical  standpoint,  losing  sight  of  its 
religious  value,  the  value  that  it  has  for  faith. 

We  think  that  it  is  indispensable  to  study  the  Scrip- 
tures historically,  that  indeed  we  must  commence  in 
this  way.  It  is  the  only  way  to  avoid  the  erroneous 
view  in  which  traditional  dogmatism  has  always  repre- 
sented it.  This  is  the  reason  why,  in  our  work,  we 
have  followed  the  strictly  historical  method.  We 
think,  however,  that  those  who  study  the  Bible  by  this 
method  should  take  especial  pains  to  show  that  its 
religious  value  is  not  impaired,  as  many  people  imag- 
ine. If  they  neglected  this  duty  they  would  sin  against 
believers.  They  would  fix  a  great  gulf  between  science 
and  faith;  they  would  prepare  the  way  for  divorcing 
historical  truth  from  piety,  a  result  that  would  be  a  sad 
one  for  both ;  for  faith  would  thenceforward  be  without 
truth,  and  truth  without  faith ;  faith  would  no  longer 
be  anything  but  superstition,  and  truth  would  become 
inseparable  from  unbelief.  Such  a  divorce,  then,  is  at 
any  cost  to  be  avoided,  and  these  last  few  lines  have  for 
their  object  to  show  how  this  is  possible. 

To  examine,  to  study  the  Bible  as  we  have  done,  is 


CONCLUSION.  M^y 

to  take  account  of  the  historical  development  of  the 
ideas  and  customs  that  are  there  revealed ;  it  is  to  show 
that  these  have  not  always  been  the  same,  that  they 
have  varied  in  the  course  of  time;  it  is  to  admit  more 
or  less  important  divergencies  among  the  biblical  docu- 
ments, doctrinal  and  historical  errors  committed  by  the 
sacred  authors.  This  is  what  startles  faith:  it  fears 
that  it  will  see  the  foundation  on  which  it  rests  shaken. 
Is  it  really  so  ?  In  a  sense,  Yes.  Faith  in  the  ortho- 
dox sense  of  intellectual  adherence  to  a  dogmatic  sys- 
tem, considered  as  perfect  and  infallible,  because,  as 
it  claims,  it  is  drawn  from  an  infallible  source,  the 
Bible,  and  rests  on  its  infallible  authority, —  such  a  faith 
is  evidently  impaired  beyond  recovery  by  the  histori- 
cal study  of  the  Bible.  But  is  this  true  faith,  faith 
in  the  biblical  sense  ?  Certainly  not.  It  is  the  product 
of  Jewish  rabbinism  and  Christian  dogmatism. 

Faith,  as  the  Bible,  especially  the  Old  Testament, 
freed  from  rabbinical  influence,  understands  it,  is  not 
faith  in  the  sacred  letter,  the  written  word,  but  faith 
in  the  manifestation  of  God  in  history,  in  his  interfer- 
ence in  the  world  with  a  view  to  the  salvation  of  hu- 
manity, faith  in  the  living  word,  inspired  by  the  divine 
spirit  in  the  prophets,  faith  in  the  holy  mission  of 
these  men  of  God.  Now  we  claim  that  this  faith  is 
not  impaired,  and  could  not  be  by  the  historical  study 
of  the  Bible,  because  this  faith  has  for  its  foundation 
not  simple  words,  but  facj^,  evident  and  undeniable 
facts. 

When,  having  shown  the  divergencies,  contradic- 
tions, errors  in  the  Bible,  we  go  below  the  surface  to 
the  substance  of  things,  we  are  obliged  to  admit  that 


346  THEOLOGY   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

the  Bible  has  not  only  a  human,  imperfect,  transitory 
side,  but  also  a  divine,  perfect,  unchangeable,  eternal 
side.  Some  have  wished  to  see  only  the  former,  others 
only  the  latter  side.  To  be  fully  in  the  right  we  must 
recognize  that  one  exists  as  well  as  the  other.  This 
is  coming  to  be  understood  more  and  more  even  among 
J  conservative  theologians.  There,  then,  is  not  the  great 
difficulty.  It  is  rather  in  separating,  distinguishing, 
in  the  Bible,  the  divine  from  the  human  elements. 
This  difficulty,  together  with  habit  and  tradition,  leads 
many  pastors  who  would  probably  admit  the  human 
and  imperfect  side  of  the  Scriptures,  to  speak  of  them 
nevertheless  as  if  they  were  from  one  end  to  the  other 
the  unadulterated  word  of  God.  This  is  encouraging 
Christian  people  in  an  illusion  which  is  thought  inno- 
cent but  which  may,  and  many  times  does,  become  in- 
jurious. In  fact  when  the  people  learn,  and  the  day 
comes  sooner  or  later,  that  the  Bible  contains  errors, 
they  are  led  to  doubt  revelation  itself,  since  they  have 
been  made  to  believe  that  it  is  to  be  identified  with  the 
so-called  infallible  letter  of  the  sacred  Scriptures. 

What  then  is  to  be  done?  Can  we  distinguish  in 
the  Bible  the  human  from  the  divine  elements,  the 
human  errors  from  the  divine  truth?  Can  we  say  that 
such  a  biblical  word  or  text  is  inspired,  and  that  such 
another  is  not?  No,  such  a  mode  of  procedure  would 
be  very  mechanical  and  superficial ;  besides  it  would  be 
impracticable.  We  must  rather  recognize  that  tradi- 
tional faith  and  theology  have  been  led  astray  by  the 
doctrine  of  the  literal  inspiration  of  the  sacred  code, 
invented  by  the  Jewish  rabbis  and  adopted  by  the  Chris- 
tian doctors.     It  is  not  the  dead  letter  in  which  inspir- 


CONCLUSION.  347 

ation  and  revelation  are  to  be  souglit,  as  tliis  doctrim; 
would  have  it,  but  the  direct  action  of  the  spirit  of  God 
upon  the  hearts  of  men.  Let  us  explain,  confining  our- 
selves to  the  Old  Testament,  with  Avhich  Ave  liave  thus 
far  had  to  do. 

We  have  just  represented  it  as  an  undeniable  fact 
that  this  part  of  the  Scriptures  contains  errors.  He 
who  gives  his  attention  exclusively  to  sacred  criticism 
instead  of  attempting  the  historical  reconstruction  of 
the  biblical  teaching,  as  we  have  done,  will  be  able  to 
discover  many  more  errors  than  have  been  casually 
noticed  or  become  apparent  from  our  work ;  he  will  be 
able  to  show  that  there  exist  a  large  number  of  scien- 
tific, historical,  and  doctrinal  errors.  The  fact  that  we 
have  stated  is  therefore  fully  established.  But  there 
is  another  which  it  seems  to  us  is  just  as  well  estab- 
lished ;  it  is  that  the  elite  of  the  Israelitish  nation  — 
at  the  head  of  whom  were  the  prophets,  the  psalmists, 
the  sacred  authors  in  general  —  were  under  the  influ- 
ence of  the  spirit  of  God,  which  communicated  to  them 
a  life  and  a  loftier  insight,  of  which  we  find  the  expres- 
sion, the  translation,  imperfect  but  actual,  in  the  Old 
Testament.  In  the  midst  of  the  people  Israel,  origi- 
nally idolatrous,  and  subject  to  all  the  vices  of  the 
Semitic  race,  there  was  formed  a  nucleus  of  men  of  God 
much  superior  to  those  about  them  in  faith,  in  insight, 
in  ethical  life.  They  were  by  no  means  perfect,  either 
with  respect  to  ideas  or  morals.  They  yielded  in  some 
measure  to  the  influence  of  their  time ;  for  no  one  can 
completely  withdraw  himself  from  the  influence  of  his 
age  and  his  environment.  But,  in  spite  of  the  imper- 
fections that  they  shared  with  the  men  of  their  time, 


11 


348      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

they  rose  to  so  pure  ideas  concerning  God  and  our  rela- 
tions to  him,  that  thus  far  they  have  not  been  sur- 
passed. That  Avhich  seems  to  us,  however,  still  more 
remarkable  than  these  ideas,  to  which  the  intellectualis- 
tic  theology  of  the  past  has  wrongly  attributed  an  exag- 
gerated or  even  exclusive  value,  that  which  appears  to 
us  more  important,  is  the  superior  life  that  distin- 
guished these  men  of  God.  There,  especially,  we 
clearly  discover  the  divine  activity. 

The  history  of  ancient  Greece  proves  that,  left  to  its 
own  powers,  human  thought  can  rise  to  very  pure 
moral  and  religious  conceptions,  and  give  admirable 
precepts.  But  it  also  proves  that  in  spite  of  fine  pre- 
cepts and  lofty  thoughts  a  people  or  an  individual  may 
remain  morally  corrupt.  We  meet  this  fact  everywhere 
and  in  all  times.  Man  is  naturally  egoistic,  and  incap- 
able of  breaking  the  yoke  of  his  egoism.  There  is 
therefore  much  more  need  of  moral  than  of  intellectual 
assistance,  and  purity  of  moral  life  is  a  safer  criterion 
of  the  divine  action  upon  the  heart  than  lofty  concep- 
tions. Now  among  the  Slite  of  the  people  Israel,  and 
more  particularly  among  the  prophets,  we  find  an  ethical 
life  that  is  truly  remarkable.  We  find  these  men  ani- 
mated by  a  sincere  and  profound  love  for  God,  by  an 
ardent  zeal  for  his  glory  and  the  establishment  of  his 
kingdom.  These  men  forgot  themselves,  living  only 
for  God  and  their  fellows,  and  that  out  of  pure  love  for 
God  and  men ;  they  even  endured,  for  the  sake  of  the 
holy  cause  that  they  defended,  the  severest  persecutions. 
When  we  examine  the  documents  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  especially  the  Psalms  and  the  prophetical  books,  we 
find  ourselves  confronted  not  merely   by  a  beautiful 


CONCLUSION.  349 

morality,  beautiful  precepts  recommended  to  others; 
these  writings  are  the  living,  so  to  speak,  palpitating 
expression  of  what  took  place  in  their  souls;  we  find 
there  the  expression  and  experience  of  a  higher  life,  a 
life  produced  by  God  and  devoted  to  God.  Behind 
these  writings  we  feel  the  beat  of  the  hearts  that  in- 
spired them,  and  behind  these  hearts  we  feel  a  higher 
power,  a  divine,  regenerating,  sanctifying  influence. 

We  find  then,  in  the  midst  of  the  people  Israel,  the 
foundation  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  the  kingdom  of  truth 
and  holiness,  the  substructure  of  that  glorious  edifice 
of  which  Christ  has  become  the  corner  stone,  which  will 
continue  to  rise  under  the  action  of  the  same  divine 
spirit  that  filled  the  prophets,  and  is  the  soul  of  all  the 
development  of  the  kingdom  of  God  throughout  the 
ages.  Here  then  is  a  solid,  immovable  basis  for  faith. 
It  rests,  not  upon  simple  words,  but  upon  facts,  his- 
torical facts  of  which  the  aggregate  constitutes  the 
kingdom  of  God;  facts  which  date  from  times  the  most 
remote  and  reveal  to  us  traces  of  the  action  of  God  upon 
the  heart,  an  action  which  we  can  discover  through 
all  the  ages  and  even  about  us  wherever  there  are  be- 
lieving hearts ;  facts  which  we  experience  in  our  OAvn 
hearts  when  we  open  them  to  the  beneficent  influence 
of  the  spirit  of  God. 

Faith  is  therefore  not  impaired  by  a  scientific  and 
historical  study  of  the  Bible.  That  which  alone  is  im- 
paired is  the  dogmatism  that  must  needs  stay  itself  upon 
an  infallible  authority.  Faith  and  piety  can  do  with- 
out this  authority  because  they  can  do  without  infalli- 
ble dogmatic  truth.  The  apostle  Paul  confesses  without 
reserve  that  Christian    knowledge  is  not  perfect  here 


350      THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

below,  that  we  can  hope  to  attain  a  perfect  knowledge 
only  in  eternity.^  But  in  spite  of  his  imperfect  knowl- 
edge what  mighty  faith  the  great  apostle  of  the  gentiles 
possessed!  And  our  faith  may  also  be  firm,  powerful, 
living,  though  we  have  not  a  perfect  knowledge  of  dog- 
matic and  metaphysical  truth,  since  we  have  no  infalli- 
ble source  and  norm  for  this  truth. 

It  is  enough  for  faith  to  have  a  firm  foundation  on 
which  it  can  rest,  to  feel  a  mighty  impulse  urging  it 
toward  God,  to  possess  a  confident  assurance  that  God 
graciously  receives  sinful  man  to  pardon  and  sanctify 
him.  It  is  enough  for  the  world  in  general  that  God  is 
so  clearly  revealed  in  his  holiness  and  love  that  each 
can  recognize  his  sinful  condition,  and  then  hope  for 
the  divine  favor.  This  legitimate  want  is  partly  satis- 
fied even  in  the  revelation  of  the  old  covenant;  it  is 
fully  satisfied  by  the  final  revelation  of  the  new  cove- 
nant, to  which  we  shall  feel  it  a  pleasure  and  a  duty  to 
turn  our  attention  if  the  public  favorably  receive  this, 
our  first  essay. 

1 1  Cor.  xiii.  9-12. 


INDEXES.^ 


I.    TOPICS  TREATED. 


Aaron :  in  early  documents,  46 ;  ac- 
cording to  C,  286  f . ;  in  Chronicles, 
etc.,  288  f. 

Abraham,  the  ideal  Hebrew,  34  f. 

Abstinence  from  wine,  70. 

Advocate  (redeemer)  of  Job,  269  f. 

Anathema,  67  f. 

Angels:  nature,  153  f . ;  functions, 
154,  254,  256;  form,  154  f. ;  orders, 
254;  names,  255;  origin  of  belief 
in,  155  f. 

Anthropomorphism:  early  preva- 
lence, 25  ff. ;  overcome  by  the 
prophets,  97;  corrected  by  the 
Jews,  248. 

Anthropopathism,  27  f. 

Antiochus  Epiphanes,  the  central  fig- 
ure of  Daniel,  333,  334,  336,  337  f., 
340. 

Apocryphal  books  cited,  6. 

Ark  of  the  Covenant:  a  symbol  of 
Jehovah's  presence,  28,  282;  a 
centre  of  worship,  42. 

Asmodeus,  262. 

Atonement:  terms  used,  311  fif , ;  ob- 
ject affected,  312  ff. ;  means  em- 
ployed, 313;  limits,  310  f. ;  theory, 
314  ff. 

Atonement,  day  of,  304  ff. 
Attributes  of  God :    moral,  114  ff. ; 
metaphysical,  120  ff. 

Beasts,  the  four,  of  Daniel,  336  ff. 


Body,  origin  and  nature  of,  159  f 

263  f. 
Bowels  =  seat  of  affections,  166. 

Centralization :  rooted  in  early  his- 
tory, 42;  the  struggle  for,  178  ff. ; 
the  accomplishment  of,  280  ff. 

Cherubim,  148  ff. 

Circumcision :  practice  of,  57 ;  mean- 
ing of,  33,  58  f. 

Compilation,  evidence  of,  in  the 
Hexateuch,  8. 

Covenant:    a    fundamental    notion, 
29  f.,  91 ;  ground  of,  30, 118 ;  nature 
of,  31  ff. ;  duties,  33,  102,  174,  318 
sign  of,  33,  58 ;  renewal  of,  207  ff . 
the  new,  and  the  gentiles,  212  ff. 
abuse  of  the  notion  of,  320. 

Covenant,  book  of,  36  ff. 

Creation :  statements  concerning, 
125  f. ;  nature  of,  126  f. ;  biblical, 
vs.  scientific  doctrine,  127  ff. ; 
bearing  of,  on  monotheism,  93. 

Daniel,  Apocalypse  of,  331  ff. 

David :  first  Hebrew  hymnist,  9 ;  an 
ethical  ideal,  35  f. ;  and  the  Mes- 
siah, 218  ff. 

Day  of  judgment:  date  of,  201  f., 
334.  337,  340,  .342  ff . ;  effects  of, 
203  ff. ;  means  used,  202  f.,  206. 

Death,  263  f. 

Deborah,  song  of,  21. 


Prepared  by  the  translator. 
351 


852 


INDEXES. 


Decalogue :  age  of,  9,  21 ;  contents 
of,  37  f. ;  on  the  Sabbath,  292  f. 

Demonology,  256  ff. 

Devil,  260  f. 

Divination  among  the  early  prophets, 
16  ff.,  81. 

Divine  element  in  Scripture,  129, 
348  f. 

Documents  of  the  Hexateuch,  3  ff. 


Ecclesiastes  and  Job,  324. 

Elohim  :  signification,  111  f. ;  a  fa- 
vorite name,  249. 

Ephod,  19,  28. 

Eternity  of  God,  121  f. 

Ethical  life :  Hebrew,  34  ff . ;  Jewish, 
316  ff. 

Evil,  moral:  origin  of,  196  f. ;  God's 
agency  in,  133. 

Evil,  physical :  cause  of,  194  f . ; 
author  of,  132;  uses  of,  202  ff., 
230ff.,273f. 

Exclusivism :  germs  of,  34 ;  persist- 
ence of,  213;  exaggeration  of, 
320  ff. 

Exile :  destructive  to  idolatry,  247 ; 
favorable  to  centralization,  180  f. ; 
productive  of  exclusivism,  321  f. 

Ezekiel:  on  the  cherubim,  148;  on 
the  Messiah,  219;  the  apostle  of 
Levitism,  276,  280,  285  f.,  293,  300, 
303,  308  f.,  313. 

Ezra,  compiler  of  the  Law,  242  f . 


Face  of  God,  143  f . 

Faith :  an  essential  of  Hebrew  piety, 
178;  decay  of,  324;  relation  to  sci- 
ence, 128  f.,  345,  349  f. 

Faithfulness  of  God:  in  the  name 
Jehovah,  102  f. ;  relation  to  his 
truthfulness,  115;  his  justice,  116; 
his  grace,  117  f. 

Faithfulness  to  Jehovah,  173  fi. 

Fall :  details  of,  193  f . ;  thought  of, 
187,  194  f. ;  effect  of,  193  f.,  196. 

Fasting:  early  practice,  71  ff. ;  on 
the  day  of  atonement,  304  ff. 


Fear  of  God,  175,  329  f . 

Feasts,  Pilgrim :  earlier  usages,  49  ff . ; 

later  modifications,  300  ff. 
First-born,  63  f. 
First-fruits,  63  f . 
Forgiveness.     See  Atonement. 
Formalism:   effect  of,  317;  opposed 

by  the  prophets,  319. 
Freedom,  human:  relation  to  divine 

sovereignty,  131  ff. ;  to  sin,  195  f . 
Future  life:  early  notions  of,  214  f.; 

supposed    traces    of    a    doctrine, 

269  ff. ;  influence  of  current  ideas, 

234,  267  f . ;    need    of    knowledge 

concerning,  238  f . 

Gentiles:  responsible  to  Jehovah, 
93  f.,  204  ff. ;  participants  in  the 
new  covenant,  212  ff. ;  later  atti- 
tude toward,  320  ff. 

Glory  of  God,  138  ff. 

Glossolaly,  88,  90. 

God,  idea  of:  early  notions,  21  ff . ; 
development  among  the  prophets, 
91  ff. :  latest  phases,  247  ff. 

God  of  hosts,  103  ff. 

Gods  other  than  Jehovah :  proofs  of 
recognition  of,  22  ff. ;  denial  of, 
94ff.,247. 

Grace  of  God,  117  ff. 

Gratitude  as  an  element  of  piety, 
176  f. 

Guilt  of  sin,  197  ff. 

Guilt  offering,  308  f . 

Hagiographa,  245  f . 

Harvest,  feast  of.  See  Feast  of 
Weeks. 

Head,  as  the  seat  of  thought,  166  f. 

Heart,  in  man's  life:  uses  of  the 
term,  162  f . ;  comparison  with 
other  organs,  164  ff. 

Heredity  as  applied  to  guilt,  200  f . 

Hexateuch:  origin,  3  ff.,  241  ff. : 
structure,  8. 

High-places :  worship  at,  40  ff . ;  op- 
position to,  178  f.;  abolition  of, 
180  f.,  280. 


INDEXES. 


353 


High-priest :  age  of  the  office,  182  f . ; 

final  functions,  28(;  ff.,  291. 
Historical  sense  among  the  Hebrews, 

7f. 
Holiness  of  God :  meaning  of,  106  £f. ; 

relation  to  his  jealousy,  etc.,  109  f. ; 

propitiated  by  atonement,  312  f. 
Holy  One  of  Israel,  106  f. 
Human  element  in  the  Bible,  345  If. 

Ideals,  ethical,  34  ff.,  189  f. 
Idolatry :  of  the  early  Hebrews,  10  f ., 

28  f. ;  persistence  of,  82, 179  f.,  186. 
Image  of  God,  169  ff. 
Immortality  of  the  soul,  274  ff. 
Imperfections  of  Scripture,  27  f.,  36  f., 

90,  128  f.,  187  f.,  217,  345  ff. 
Imputation,  198  ff.,  230  f.,  233. 
Individualism,  33. 
Inspiration :   of  the  prophets,  83  f . ; 

in  the  Scriptures,  347  f. 

Jealousy  of  God,  109. 

Jehovah :  etymology,  99  f . ;  signifi- 
cation, 101  ff. 

Jeremiah:  on  sacrifices,  184;  on  the 
Messiah,  219. 

Jerusalem,  the  centre  of  humanity, 
215. 

Jesus,  typified  by  the  Servant,  226; 
the  corner-stone  of  the  kingdom  of 
God,  349. 

Job,  book  of:  outline  of,  236  f. ;  on 
the  problem  of  evil,  237  f. ;  on  the 
future  life,  239,  269  f. ;  on  Satan, 
257  f . 

Josiah's  reform,  180. 

Jubilee,  year  of,  298  f. 

Justice  of  God,  115  ff. 

Knowledge  concerning  God :  an  ele- 
ment of  Hebrew  piety,  178 ;  denied 
by  Jews,  248  f . 

Law:  the  earliest  fragments,  36  ff., 

241  f . ;  the  rule  of  life,  187  f. ;  the 
development,    242;     adoption     of, 

242  f. ;  importance  of,  to  the  Jews, 

243  f. 


jLevites:     original    relation    to    the 
I      priesthood,   44  ff. ;     according    to 
Deuteronomy,  IHl  ff. ;    under  the 
I      restoration,  285  ff.,  289  f. 
I  Levitism,  276  ff. 
!  Likeness  of  God,  170. 
j  Literature  of  O.  T.  Theology,  3  ff. 
j  Logos:   identified  with  the  malakh, 
1      14«) ;  origin  of  doctrine  of,  250. 
Lord  (my),  114. 
Love  of  God,  119  f. 
Love  as  an  element  of  piety :  toward 
God,  175  f . ;  toward  one's  neighbor, 
177  f. 

Malakh  of  God,  144  ff. 

Man :  nature  of,  159  ff. ;  dignity  of, 
167  ff. ;  primitive  condition  of, 
192  ff. 

Manifestation  of  God,  137  ff. 

Messiah:  origin  of  the  idea  of,  218; 
identity  of,  218  ff.;  functions  of, 
222;  character  and  qualifications, 
223  ff. ;  not  the  Servant  of  deutero- 
Isaiah,  228 ;  nor  the  son  of  man  in 
Daniel,  338  f. 

Messianic  kingdom,  334,  338,  340  ff. 

Method  in  Biblical  Theologj',  1,  344  f. 

Mighty  One,  113. 

Miracles,  136  f. 

Monolatry:  the  early  Hebrew  re- 
ligion, 21  ff. ;  a  stage  toward  mono- 
theism, 92. 

Monotheism:  age  of,  22  ff.,  92  ff . ; 
triumph  of,  247. 

Mosaism,  7  ff. 

Moses:  historical  reality  of ,  9 ;  woik 
of,  7,  9,  11,21,30,46. 

Most-High,  113. 

Music,  as  a  stimulus  to  inspiration,  15. 

Name  of  God,  141  f. 

Names  of  God :  number  and  significa- 
tion, 99  ff. ;  FAohim  and  Yahicch, 
249  f . 

Nature,  forces  of,  personified,  156. 

Nature :  laws  of,  134  f . ;  restoration 
of,  210  f . 

Nazirate,  68  ff. 


354 


INDEXES. 


Nebuchadnezzar's  image,  334  ff. 

Necromancy,  20. 

Nehemiah:  his  reforms,  278  f.,  295; 

his  Pharisaism,  320. 
New  moon :   the  original  festival,  48 

f . ;  later  development,  299  f. 

Omnipotence  of  God,  120  f. 
Omnipresence  of  God,  122  f . 
Omniscience  of  God,  123  f. 

Particularism.    See  Exclusivism. 

Passover,  feast  of :  origin  of,  50  f . ; 
union  with  that  of  unleavened 
bread,  51  f. ;  laws  concerning, 
52  f . ;  significance  of,  53  f . ;  final 
modifications,  300  f. 

Patriarchs,  religion  of,  10. 

Pentateuch.    See  Hexateuch. 

Periods  in  Biblical  Theology,  2. 

Personality  of  God,  96  f. 

Pharisaism,  316  ff. 

Philosophy,  Greek,  and  its  influence, 
248,  253,  275  f. 

Prayer,  65. 

Priesthood :  original  universality  of, 
43  If. ;  assumption  by  the  Levites, 
45  f . ;  secured  to  the  Levites  by 
Deuteronomy,  181  ff. ;  Ezekiel's 
innovations,  285  f. ;  final  stage  of 
development,  286  ff. ;  theory  of, 
289  ff. 

Priests  as  agents  of  revelation,  18. 

Prophetism:  in  its  origin,  11  ff . ;  in 
its  purity,  81  ff. 

Prophets:  beginning  from  Moses, 
11  f.;  schools  of,  12  ff.;  state  of, 
when  prophesying,  14  ff.,  87  ff. ; 
sometimes  also  priests,  17  f.; 
means  employed  by,  81  f . ;  attitude 
toward  idolatry,  82;  names  ap- 
plied to,  83  ff. ;  the  source  of  their 
gifts,  and  authority,  84,  347  ff. ; 
functions  of,  85  f . ;  relation  of,  to 
ritual,  183  ff.,  276  f. ;  tendency  of, 
to  universalism,  212  ff. 

Prophets,  i.e.  the  second  division  of 
the  canon,  244  f . 


Providence,  129  ff. 
Psychology,  biblical,  159,  164  f . 
Purifications:  variety  of ,  75 ;  signifi- 
cance of,  75  f . 
Purim,  feast  of,  306. 

Ram  and  he-goat  of  Daniel,  339  f . 

Reins  =  heart,  166. 

Resurrection:    rise  of    doctrine    of, 

273  f . ;    relation    to    immortality, 

275  f. 
Retribution:    guaranteed  by  divine 

justice,     116;      early    theory    of 

233  f . ;  later  speculations  concern 

ing,  234  ff. 
Righteousness:    essence  of,   174  ff. 

317  ff.;  relative  character  of,  189  ff 

Sabbath:    original  notion  of,  47  f. 
Levitical  doctrine  of,  292  ff. 

Sabbatical  year,  296  ff. 

Sacrifices :  antiquity  of,  59  f.,  307  f. ; 
early  simplicity  of,  60  f . ;  notion 
of,  61  f.;  human,  62;  later  com- 
plexity, 307  f. ;  final  varieties,  308  f. 

Sages  of  Israel,  327  f. 

Salvation :  grounds  for,  207 ;  partici- 
pants in,  207,  212  ff. ;  conditions 
of,  207  f. ;  blessings  of,  209  ff. 

Samuel :  greatness  of,  12 ;  connec- 
tion with  schools  of  prophets,  12  f.; 
a  priest,  45. 

Sanctuary,  the :  in  the  desert,  281 ; 
at  Jerusalem,  179,  180  f.,  280;  idea 
of,  281  ff. ;  erroneous  conceptions 
of,  283  ff. 

Satan,  258  ff. 

Scepticism,  323  ff. 

Scripture,  Holy :  origin  of,  241  ff . ; 
authority  of,  246. 

Scriptures  =  Hagiographa,  245. 

Seers,  as  compared  with  prophets,  83. 

Serapliim,  150  ff. 

Serpent  of  Eden,  260  f. 

Servant  of  Jehovah:  identity  of, 
226  ff . ;  work  of,  214,  228  ff . ;  origin 
of  idea  of,  233. 

Sheol,  the  abode  of  the  dead,  264  ff. 


INDEXES. 


355 


Signs  as  means  of  revelation,  19. 

Sin :  forms  of,  185  f . ;  essence  of, 
186  ff . ;  extent  of,  189  ff. ;  origin 
of,  192  ff . ;  guilt  of,  197  ff . 

Sin  offering,  308  f. 

Solidarity :  a  feature  of  the  covenant, 
33;  an  element  in  theodicy,  334  f. 

Son  of  man  in  Daniel,  338. 

Soul,  the  spiritual  principle  in  man : 
terms  employed,  160  ff. ;  actual 
conception  of,  164  f . ;  pre-existence 
of,  167. 

Sovereignty  of  God,  131  ff. 

Speculation  among  the  Jews:  with 
reference  to  God,  247  ff. ;  the  prod- 
uct of  Greek  philosophy,  330. 

Spirit  of  God :  meaning  of,  98  f . ;  in 
the  prophets,  83  f.,  347  ff. ;  a  mani- 
festation of  God,  156  f . ;  agent  of 
creation,  126,  135;  a  force  in 
human  experience,  157  f . ;  relation 
to  evil,  158;  a  supposed  hyposta- 
sis, 250. 

Spirit  of  man,  161  ff . 

Spirituality  of  God :  unknown  to  the 
ancient  Hebrews,  25,  28;  grasped 
by  the  prophets,  97 ;  nature  of  the 
conception,  98  f . 

Spirits,  evil:  early  conceptions,  158; 
later  ideas,  256  ff. 

Strong  One,  113. 

Substitution,  supposed,  315  f. 

Tabernacle:  unreality  of,  280;  idea 
of,  281  f . 

Tabernacles,  feast  of:  earlier  cele- 
bration of,  55  f . ;  later  modifica- 
tions, 303  f . 

Teraphim,  28. 

Theocratic  idea:  origin  of,  21  f. ; 
exemplified  in  offerings,  etc.,  63; 
relation  to  the  Messianic,  209. 

Theology:  foreign  to  the  prophets, 
91  f.,  98;  pursued  by  the  Jewish 
doctors,  247  f. 

Tithes:  symbolism  of,  63;  destina- 
tion of,  64  f . 

Translation  of  Enoch  and  Elijah,  as 
bearing  on  death,  264. 


Tree  of  life,  194,  263  f. 
Trinity,  supposed  traces  of  doctrine 
of,  225,  226,  250  ff. 

Uncleanness :  forms  of,  73  f . ;  theory 
concerning,  77  f . ;  conditions  re- 
lated to,  78  f. 

Unity  of  God,  92. 

Universalism  :  first  traces  of,  119  f. ; 
best  expressions  of,  212  ff.,  325  f. ; 
reaction  against,  320  f. 

Unleavened  bread,  feast  of,  50  f .,  53  f . 

Urim  and  thummim,  17  f.,  20. 

Vengeance  of  God,  111. 

Visions :  as  forms  of  prophecy,  87  f . ; 

as  a  means  of  revelation,  17,  89. 
Vows,  66  f . 

Watchman  =  prophet,  85  f . 

Weeks,  feast  of:  early  regulations 
concerning,  54  f . ;  adaptation  of, 
to  the  Levitical  system,  ^302  f. 

Weeks,  the  seventy,  of  Daniel,  341  ff. 

Wine,  abstinence  from,  70. 

Wisdom:  as  a  synonym  for  virtue, 
326  f . ;  power  of,  329  f . ;  nature  and 
object.  330  f. 

Wisdom  of  God:  late  origin  of  the 
doctrine,  124;  as  a  hypostasis, 
250  ff. 

Woman :  position  of,  36,  59 ;  relation 
to  man,  168  f. 

AVord  of  God :  as  a  message  to  the 
prophets,  83  f.,  87 ;  as  a  manifesta- 
tion of  God,  250. 

Works,  merit  of,  319  f. 

Worship:  primitive  character  of, 
39  ff. ;  modifications  of,  during  the 
prophetic  period,  178  ff. ;  develop- 
ment of,  into  Levitism,  276  ff. 

Worship,  places  of:  ancient  freedom 
respecting,  39  ff. ;  reforms  con- 
cerning, 178  ff. ;  reduced  to  one, 
280  tf. 

Wratli  of  God,  109  f. 

Yahrveh  or  Jehovah:  signification 
of.  99  ff. ;  use  of,  249  f , 


356 


INDEXES. 


II.     AUTHORS  QUOTED. 


Anger,  R.,  218. 

Baudissin,  W.  W. :   Studien,  I. :  23, 

24,  25,  92,  93,  94,  95,  112,  152,  261 ; 

II. :  31,  40,  106,  107,  138. 
Baur,  Gus. :  de  Wette's  Psalmen,  104; 

Gesch.d.  A.  T.  Weissagung,  218. 
Beck,  J.  T.,  164. 
Bertheau,   E.:    JDT.,  91;   Richter, 

112. 
[Bible  Commentary,  70.] 
Bleek,  F.,  83,  88. 
Bruch,  J.  F.,  127,  195,  327. 
Bruston,  C,  224,  225. 
Budde,  K.,  153. 

[Cheyne,  T.  K.,  104.] 

Colin,  D.  G.  K.  von,  2, 104, 167,  275. 

Delitzsch,  F.:  [Genesis,  101,  153]; 
Psalms,  104, 112;  Psychology,  164. 

Diestel,  L.,  115,  117. 

Dillmann,  A.:  Genesis,  128, 129, 153; 
Exodus  u.  Leviticus,  37,  38,  44,  47, 
50,  51,  52,  54,  57,  58,  59,  61,  62,  64, 
68,  75,  101,  112,  146,  293,  294,  295. 

[Dods,  M.,  128,  129.] 

[Driver,  S.  R.,  325.] 

Ewald  H.,  41,  [49, 50,  58, 62, 71, 77, 78, 
306.] 

Graf,  K.  H.,  64,  65. 
Grimm,  C.  L.  W.,  126. 

Haag,  E.,  124,  259,  275. 

Havernick,  H.  A.  C,  101,  104,  114, 

170,  199. 
Harless,  G.  C.  A.,  164. 
Hengstenberg,  E.  W.,  87. 
Hitzig,  F.:  Daniel,  21^;  Bib.  TheoL, 

112 ;  Mes.  Weissagung,  218. 
Hofmann,  J.  C.  K. :   Schriftheweis, 

112,  170;  Theologie,  164. 
Hupfeld,  H.,  104. 


Knobel,  A.:  Exodus  u.  Leviticus, 
261,  284;  Prophetismus,  158. 

Kohler,  A.,  91. 

Kuenen,  A. :  Hist.  Critique,  88 ; 
[Eel.  of  Israel,  30,  96,  112,  275.] 

[Lenormant,  F.,  129,  150, 153.] 

Maybaum,  S.,  13,  18,  83. 
[Montefiore,  C.  G.,  19, 23, 92,  95, 274.] 
Muller,  J.,  172. 

Nicolas,  M.,  2,  248,  250,  255,  256,  273, 

274,  275. 

Oehler,  G.  F.,  2, 18,  51,  58, 59,  88,  101, 
104,  109,  112,  113,  114,  115, 137, 142, 
146,  155,  156,  165,  167,  170, 183, 199, 
202,  225,  259,  270,  327. 

Philo,  87,  248. 

Reuss,  E. :  Geschichte  d.  heil. 
Schriften  A.  T.,  11,  14,  19,  30,  47, 
50,  53,  58,  112,  126,  153,  162,  242, 
269,  278;  La  Bible  (misc.),  15,  19, 
50,  53,  58,  142,  146,  151,  153,  224, 
225,  270,  271,  273;  Prophete,  11, 14, 
88,  104 ;  Hist.  Sainte,  47,  48, 50, 53, 
65,  172,  298 ;  Philosophie,  269,  275, 
325;  Apocalypse,  274;  TheoL 
Chret.,  274. 

Riehm,  E.:  Gesetzgebung  Mosis, 
64;  Mes.  Prophecy,  90;  Stud.  u. 
Krit.,  312. 

Riehm's  Handworterbuch,  19,  49,  50, 
55,  58,  59,  64,  70,  71,  129,  150,  293, 
298. 

Ritschl,  A.,  109. 

[Robertson,  J.,  14.] 

Rothe,  R.,  195. 

[Schaff-Herzog's  Cyclopedia,  75, 
172.] 


INDEXES. 


357 


Schenkel's  Bibel-Lexikon,  49,  50, 
51,  55,  57,  58,  70, 71, 73,  77, 100, 104, 

150,  306. 

Schrader,  E.;  JPT.,  104;  [KAT., 
47,  100.] 

Schultz,  H.,  11,  [24,]  25,  [40,  48,  64, 
70,  88,  93,  94,]  98,  101,  [104,  106,] 
109,  112,  113,  114,  [117,]  126,  [127,] 
143,  [146,]  150,  151,  155,  [158,]  164, 
167, 170, 171,  172, 188, 196, 202,  [224, 
225,]  269,  [315,]  318. 

Schiirer,  E.,  244,  343. 

Segond,  L.,  6,  69. 

Seinecke,  L.,  274. 

[Smith,  G.  A.,  224.] 

[Smith,  W.  R. :  Old  Test.,  18, 19,  242 ; 
Prophets,  23,  31,  70,  91,  106.] 

[Smith's  Dictionary,  20,  57,  88,  150, 

151,  284,  293.] 


Stapfer,  E.,  2,  248,  250,  255,  338. 
Steiner,  68. 

[Toy,  C.  H.,  248,  250,  255,  269,  338.] 
Tholuck,  F.  A.  G.,  88. 

Umbreit,  F.  W.  K.,  193. 

Vatke,  W.,  19,  30,  46. 

Wellhausen,  J.,  18, 46,  [51,  53,  55, 64,] 

,65,  182,  195,  278,  281,  287,  288,  294, 

296,  298. 
Wette,  W.  M.  L.  de:   Archeoloqie, 

62,  66,  77,  78, 104, 112, 155,  156,  167 ; 

Bib.  Dogmatik,  2,  98. 
Winer's  Reahoorterbuch,  20, 151, 284. 
Wittichen,  C,  338. 


III.    PASSAGES  CITED  IN  THE  TEXT. 


Genesis. 

PAGE 

i 126,  128 

i.  1 126 

i.  2 250 

i.  26 169,170,172 

1.  26f 169 

i.  27 170 

i.  31 172 

ii.  1 104 

ii.  24 168 

iii.  22 155 

vi.  1-4 153, 154,  263 

xvi.  7-12 144 

xvi.  13 144 

xviii.  14 121 


PAGI 

xMii.  15  f 145 

xlix.  18 270 

Exodus. 

iii.  2-6 145 

iii.  14 100 

iv.  16 85 

iv.  24-26 58 

vii.  1 85 

xii.  8 51 

xii.  21 145 

xiv.  19 145 

xiv.  24  f 145 

XV 53,  93,  110,  120,  176,  981 

XV.  11 L'4 

xxi.  17-19 145  '  XV.  13 117 

xxi.  33 122  I  XV.  17  f 281 

xxii.  11-18 145  [  XV.  18 122 

xxiv 36  I  xix.  6 44 

xxxi.  11-13 145    xx.-xxiii 8,  36 

xxxi.  42 112    XX.  2  f 24 

xxxi.  53 112  ;  XX.  5 199 

xxxii.  20 311  I  XX.  11 127 

xii.  38 157  I  XX.  24  f 41 


358 


INDEXES. 


PAGE 

xxi.  6= 112 

xxii.  8f 112 

xxii.  28 112 

xxiii.  19 52 

xxxi.  12-17 284 

xxxii.  4 29 

xxxiii.  4  f 29 

xxxiii.  14-16 143 

xxxiii.  19 118,  119 

xxxiv 8 

xxxiv.  5  f 102,  118, 119 

xxxiv.  11-26 36 

xxxiv.  26 52 

Leviticus. 

i.-vii 308 

xvi 288,  305 

xvii 180 

xvii. -xxvi.  5 177,  277,  280 

x^ai.  11 314,  315 

x^iii.  -XX 277 

xxiii 54 

xxiii.  9fE 52 

xxiii.  9-14 50 

xxiii.  10 54 

xxiv.  16 249 

xxvii.  28 68 

Numbers. 

iv.  25-27 144 

vi 69 

vi.  6  ff 69 

viii.  5,22 290 

xii.  6-8 88,  89,  90 

XV.  27-31 310 

xxii.  22 258 

xxii.  32 258 

XXV.  19 115 

Deuteronomy. 

iv.  31 119 

iv,  37 143 

V 36,  128 

vi.  15 110 

vii.9 102,  118 

XV.  21 64 

xvi.  9 50 


PAGE 

xviii.  15 220 

xviii.  18 220 

XX.  6 71 

xxi.  9 181 

xxi.  25 181 

xxiii.  12  f 76 

xxviii.  30 71 

XXX.  15-20 131 

xxxii 94,  102,  121 

xxxii.  3 102 

xxxii.  4 115 

xxxii.  8 256 

xxxii.  16 110 

xxxii.  22  ff 110 

xxxii.  43 311 

xxxiii.  2 153 

xxxiii.  8 18 

Joshua. 
V.  13-15 254 

Judges. 

ii.  Iff 145 

V 120,  176 

V.  8 112 

vi.  7  ft 11 

vi.  11-16 145 

vi .  20-24 145 

vii.  13  f 17 

ix.9 155 

ix.  13 155 

ix.  23 158 

xxi.  19ff 55 

1  Samuel. 

ii 121 

ii.  25 112 

ii.  27  ff 11,46 

X.5 14,  15 

XV.  22 183,184 

xvii.  45 105 

xix.  20  ff 14 

xxiii.  9  ff 19 

XXV.  37 162 

xxviii 20 

xxviii.  6 17 

XXX.  7f 19 


INDEXES. 


359 


2  Samuel. 


PAGE 

..289 


vii.  27-29 115 

XV.  24 182 

xxii.  11 147 

xxiv.  1 260 

1  Kings. 

ii.  3 142 

iii.  5  ff 17 

viii.  4 182 

xii.  16 220 

xiii.  18 254 

xxii.  19-23 257 


2  Kings. 


iii.  15 

xiv.  6 

xxi.  8 

xxii.  f 

xxiii 

xxiii.  9. . . . 
xxiii.  21  ff. 


.  15 
.242 
.242 
.242 
.180 
.286 
.301 


1  Chronicles. 

XV 289 

xxi.  1 259 

xxi.  18 254 


2  Ghbonicles. 


V.  5.... 

xii.  5-7. 

XXXV.  .  . 


.182 
.117 
.301 


Esther. 
ix.  17-32 306 

Job. 

i.-ii 257,258 

iv.  18 153 

xii.  10 161 

xvi.  19-22 269 

xix.  25-27 269 

xxviii.  12ff 251 

xxviii.  23ff 251 

xxxiii.  23 153 

zzzyiii.  7.  •  <  • <  •  •  • ^^^  I 


Psalms. 

PAGE 

vi" 170,  171 

xvi.  10  f 271 

xviii 150 

xviii.  10 147 

xxi.  9 143 

xxxii 191 

xxxii.  11 191 

xxxiii.  6 250 

xlix.  15 271,  272 

Ixxiii.  24-26 272 

Ixxviii.  58  f no 

Ixxxii.  6 112 

Ixxxix 115,  118 

xci.  11 153 

ciii.  20 153 

civ.  29 159 

cxlvii.  15 250 

cxlviii.  2 153 

Proverbs. 

i.-ix 5 

viii.  22  ff 125,  251 

X.  1-xxii.  16 5 

X.  7 270 

xiv.  32 270 

XV.  24 270 

xvi.  6 312 

xvi.  14 312 

XXV.  -  xxix 5 

Isaiah. 

i.  -xii 3 

vi.1-7 150 

ix 221 

ix.  6f 223 

ix.7 220 

xiii.  1-xiv.  23 4 

xiv.  24-32 3 

XV.  1-xvi.  12 3 

xvii.  -XX 3 

xxi.  1-10 4 

xxi.  11-xxiii.  18 3 

xxiv.  -  xxvii 4 

xxvi.  19 273 

xxviii.  -  xxxiii 3 

xxxiv.  f 4 

xxxvii.  21-35 4 

xxxviii.9-20 4 


360 


INDEXES. 


PAGK 

xl.-lxvi 4 

xli.  8  if 226 

xlii.  1-7 226 

xlii.  18  ff 226 

xliii.  1-10 226 

xliv.  1  f 226 

xliv.  21-26 226 

xlv.  4 226 

xlviii.  16 250 

xlviii.  20 226 

xlix.  1-9 , 226 

1.  4-10 226 

lii.  13-15 230 

lii.  13-liii.  12 226,  230 

liii 227,232,236 

liii.7 230 

Iv.  11 250 

Ixiii.  10 250 

lxv.8-10 231 

Jeremiah. 

vi.  27 86 

vii.  22  f 184 

xxxiii.  6 225 

xxxiii.  18 181 

xxxiii.  21  f 181 

l.-lii 4 

Lamentations. 
iv.  16 143 

EZEKIEL. 

i 148 

iii.  17 86 

X 148 

XXV.  14 Ill 

XXV.  17 Ill 

xxxiii.  7 86 

xxxviii.  18-23 109 

xlv.  25 56 

Daniel. 

ii 334 

vii 336 

vii.  25 338 

viii 339 

ix 341 

ix.  25 342 

ix.26 342 


PAGE 

X 332 

xi .332 

xii.  2f 272 

xii.7 338 

Hosea. 

ii.  19 118 

iii.  5 222 

viii.  12 242 

xii.  9 55 

MiCAH. 

V 221 

V.  7-9 213 

V.  9 213 

Nahum. 
i.  2 Ill 

Zechariah. 

i.-viii 4 

iii.  1 259 

iv.  9 221 

ix.-xi 3 

ix 221 

ix.9 222 

ix.  9f 220 

xii.-xiv 4,220 

xii.  8 145,225 

xiv.  16-19 56 

1  Maccabees. 

iii.  49 69 

2  Maccabees. 

ii.  13 245 

iv.34 342 

vii.  28 126 

SiBACH. 

xliv.  -xlix 245 

Wisdom. 
ii.23f 262 

Acts. 
xxi.  23f 69 

1  Corinthians. 
xiv 90 


INDEXES. 


361 


IV.     HEBREW  TERMS. 


acharith-kayyamim  (the  latter  days), 

202. 
Adhon  {Lord) ,  114. 
Adhonay  (my  Lord),  114,  249. 
asham  (be  guilty),  197. 
Attah-El-rol  (Thou  God  seest  me), 

145. 
Azazel,  261. 

bene-Elohim  (sons  of  God),  155. 

chayyah  (living),  160. 
chesedh  (grace),  117. 

ehyeh  (lam),  100. 

El  (God),  113,  120. 

elilim  (loorthless) ,  95. 

Elohim  (God),  103,  111  f.,  155,  249. 

elyon  (highest),  113. 

hawah,  hayah  (he),  100. 

kaphar  (cover),  311. 
kasah  (cover),  312. 

lebh,  lebhabh  (heart),  162. 

malakh  (angel),  144  f.,  153  f.,  258. 
minchah  (gift),  61. 


nabhi  (prophet) ,  83. 
nazir  (consecrated),  69. 
nephesh  (soul),  160  f.,  165, 167. 
neshamah  (breath),  162. 

olam,  (eternity),  122. 

pesach  (passover),  51. 

qadhesh  (be  holy) ,  108. 
qadhosh  (holy) ,  69,  106. 
gorftaw  (^(/•0,61,  316. 

rwacA  (spirit),  161, 167,  257. 

safaw  (adversary) ,  258. 
saraph  (seraph),  151. 
sebhaoth  (hosts),  103  ff. 
se'irim  (satyrs),  261. 
shadday  (almigJity),  113, 120. 
shedhim  (demons),  261. 
sAeo^  (Hades),  266  f. 
sidheqoth  (righteous  deeds),  117. 

foraA  (instruction),  241. 
Ta/izoe/i  (Jehovah),  100,  249  f. 


Princeton   Theological   Seminary   Libraries 


1    1012   01193   8927 


Date  Due 

^B-'m 

1 

... 

1 

V  .  ' 

i 

■' 

■- 

\i 

■-^li 

^ 

^ 

m^    1 

m       ^^M 

1          i 

1          i 

1 

1 

1 

^ 

I 

-■  ?v«;. 


